A new Supreme Court ruling will allow some students with learning disabilities to attend private schools on public funds. But it's more complicated than that. Jill Simmons, former president of the Glen Ridge Association for Special Education, explained that the ruling allows kids who aren't technically identified as special needs to get reimbursement for services from private schools.
"It's controversial because the child doesn't have to be already identified," Simmons said. If he's not identified, then he hasn't been in public special needs classes. "But there are strict criteria to meet. Maybe a child isn't quite meeting the criteria, then this could be a wonderful thing for the parents."
School districts already pay private fees when they cannot provide adequate help under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. But they do try to provide services within their public schools first. Sometimes districts fight to keep the student in the public system, and after Monday's Supreme Court ruling, it will be harder for districts to win when students want to go private.
"It's wonderfully great news for parents who have battled with school districts who have been trying to get services," Simmons said. "But for school districts, spreading around the small amount of dollars available will be a big, big burden."
According to NPR, the ruling involved a teenage boy in Oregon. He probably had Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. He was having trouble in school, but the Forest Grove School District officials (outside of Portland, Oregon), suspected marijuana use and refused special needs services. His parents pulled him out of public school and sent him to a private residential academy.
They sued the school district for the $65,000 they spent on private tuition. They school says he should've tried their services first; but the parents say the school refused services.
Will the ruling lead to a spike in private placements without consulting school districts? That's the worry many have.
The Education Departments stated that nationwide, just under 67,000 students are in private schools, which is 1.1 percent of the countrys 6 million special ed children.
Photo by D. B. King
Digg
Delicious
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Comments (7)
yes. (without reading the thread, just the headline) I know when I went to G.R. schools and we had a special student, they would pay for them to go to another school. Its easier and cheaper than hiring a teacher and use classroom space for one person's needs. Now, if you can find a bunch of slow kids, then it would justify hiring someone. Like the "resource room."
If the public doesnt pay for the special kid's needs, then you can argue that those parents shouldnt pay education taxes, which will lead to resident's who have no children protesting the tax as well. Its only 4 years or so, suck it up
My understanding is that the parents won the RIGHT to sue for reimbursement.
Personally, I think that parents should first attempt to get their kids into the public system (even a neighboring town if necessary). If it's inadequate, or if the town cannot meet the needs in some way, then private institutions should be used.
This particular case sounds suspicious to me. I mean, it's not unheard of that kids have trouble in school due to pot smoking...or many other reasons that have nothing (or little) to do with needing services due to "special needs." Hopefully this won't open the flood gates. And hopefully there will be more consistency and attention paid regarding criteria for diagnosis.
Can someone clarify this...
"kids who aren't technically identified as special needs"
Does that mean if I decide my little precious is special, but no doctor or school administrator agrees with me, I still get to send said precious to private school at the tax payers cost?
I do have mixed feelings about these cases as my son is currently placed out of district at a private spec. ed school at the district's expense, which I strongly believe is the right thing to do as they can not adequetly educate him. However, I am well aware of the cost and as a tax payer, I do think there need to be sufficient standards and safeguards to ensure that kids are not unnecessarily sent out of district. You certainly don't want to "open the floodgates", but it's also unfair that parents often have to go to great lengths (lawsuits)and incur great expense to get their children the education they need.
The facts of this particular case are not really clear though, so probably premature to speculate it's effect on these situations.
Oh boy here comes the sped deluge. Montclair is already known as a special ed mecca in Park Slope and Upper West Side. There go our taxes again.
Whatsupwiththat,
You write:
"Oh boy here comes the sped deluge. Montclair is already known as a special ed mecca in Park Slope and Upper West Side. There go our taxes again."
Did you miss out on those "special" classes you needed? Such a shame!
Jimmytown,
You write:
"Its easier and cheaper than hiring a teacher and use classroom space for one person's needs. Now, if you can find a bunch of slow kids, then it would justify hiring someone. Like the "resource room."
Now I might have made an unkind remark about your lack of class, sensitivity and social conscience given the above comment but I did read on.
You go on to say:
"Its only 4 years or so, suck it up."
Why jimmy, I'd be willing to bet that even those "slow kids" know that it's more like 12 years (unless you want to add K & pre-K) so that "4 years or so" comment leaves me wondering about your ability to comprehend, learn and count!