Posts
An e-mail-based alert service designed to inform you about all new content posted to the IES website including news from its four Centers and programs within Centers such as the Regional Educational Laboratory Program.
This came today:
This Issue Brief reports the timing of entry into special education and the number of grades in which students receive special education across the primary grades. About 12 percent of students receive special education in at least one of the grades: kindergarten, first, and third grade, including 16 percent of boys, 8 percent of girls, 18 percent of poor children, and 10 percent of nonpoor children. One in three students who receive special education in early grades, first receive special education in kindergarten. Half of those who begin special education in kindergarten are no longer receiving special education by third grade. In addition to students’ gender and poverty status, results are presented separately for other student and school characteristics, including race/ethnicity and school control, urbanicity, region, and poverty concentration. Data for this brief come from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K).
To download, view and print the publication as a PDF file, please visit:
Timing and Duration of Student Participation in Special Education in the Primary Grades
in a nutshell
- 12 percent of students receive special education in kindergarten, 1st, or 3rd grades
- 8 percent of girls
- 16 percent of boys
- 18 percent of poor children
- 10 percent of all children
- 1/2 of children receiving special ed in kindergarten are no longer receiving it in 3rd grade
These figures don't surprise me.
Special ed is the only part of our public schools in which children have legal rights, and in which direct instruction prevails.
You can't count on schools providing evidence-based instruction in special ed. That's an ongoing battle everywhere.
But the school assumes it has some responsibility to teach the material on the IEP and to assess whether the material has been mastered.
update
from a Commenter:
Many school districts do not use direct instruction for special ed students. They take constructivist curricula like Everyday Math and modify it a little for the special ed students.
The special ed teachers try to make it more explicit and direct than it would otherwise be, but it's still, at heart, a discovery based program.
It's one of the drawbacks to full inclusion. If the general ed kids are doing constructivist math, the special ed kids are doing it also. If the general ed kids are doing "balanced literacy," then so are the special ed kids, even if they desperately need phonics.
As for IEPs, the schools usually set very modest goals for themselves. When they have to ensure that a child has to actually master something, they are very, very careful. For example, in an IEP, they'll take an area where the kid has 50% mastery and make the IEP goal 80% mastery.
Kids who receive special ed in kindergarten are probably those who have more specific, discrete problems. I don't think the schools are so successful with the older kids who are labeled with learning disabilities.
Actually, this is an interesting question. Who are the kindergarten kids in SPED, the ones who are no longer classified in 3rd grade?
I've known quite a few of these kids, but I'm not sure I can make a generalization.
I think it's correct to say that they had mild language delays.
But I'm not sure.
5 comments:
"Special ed is the only part of our public schools in which children have legal rights, and in which direct instruction prevails."
Many school districts do not use direct instruction for special ed students. They take constructivist curricula like Everyday Math and modify it a little for the special ed students.
The special ed teachers try to make it more explicit and direct than it would otherwise be, but it's still, at heart, a discovery based program.
It's one of the drawbacks to full inclusion. If the general ed kids are doing constructivist math, the special ed kids are doing it also. If the general ed kids are doing "balanced literacy," then so are the special ed kids, even if they desparately need phonics.
As for IEPs, the schools usually set very modest goals for themselves. When they have to ensure that a child has to actually master something, they are very, very careful. For example, in an IEP, they'll take an area where the kid has 50% mastery and make the IEP goal 80% mastery.
Kids who receive special ed in kindergarten are probably those who have more specific, discrete problems. I don't think the schools are so successful with the older kids who are labeled with learning disabilities.
oh, this is horrifying
thanks for posting
I agree about IEPs.
Special ed is no paradise.
But having had two SPED kids & 1 regular-ed kid, I prefer SPED.
I'd have to agree with anon.
In my experience even the self-contained kids in both the grade schools and the middle school had to "try" whatever new program was being implemented. The teachers didn't appear to have a choice.
They modify by slowing it down even more and using readings or math problems from earlier years. From what I could tell they would give it a good try for a month or two and then slip back to what they were doing before.
In the middle school the SPED kids were to partake in the new reading program that involved a lot of comprehension "strategies" or deep structure techniques. These kids are still struggling with decoding and are unable in many cases to tell you what they just read.
Brand new language is introduced to them (inferences, transitions, activating prior knowledge, etc....) and expected to be understood when they still can't answer the simple question, "What was this about?"
I would have to say based on my experience with my own school that anonymous is correct regarding the lack of direct instruction for special ed kids. The curriculum is the same for all kids at my school, but special ed simply receives a watered down version. It is for this reason I had to get my son out of the first third class he was in at the beginning of the year.
His current class is still a discovery based program that includes balanced literacy and TERC math. The only difference is the worksheets are slightly more advanced than before. He does more group work. The pacing is a bit faster.
I've come to accept that I would rather my son be a B/C student in a slightly more advanced class than an A student in a full inclusion class. An inclusion class that uses a slightly different and slower version of the same crappy curriculum everyone is being subjected to.
I feel a rant coming on so bear with me.
However, as my neighbor pointed out, the curriculum in the county is so progressive and creative. The kids do so well on the SOL test. Afterall, she tells me, "there are only a few kids who really need NCLB and those kids are the immigrant and blue collar worker kids." From her perspective, the poor kids are making it more difficult for the rich, white kids...you know, the children of lawyers and doctors...professionals. The teachers are so busy helping these kids that they aren't paying attention to other students. The testing is unfair because let's face it "their are just some who will not make it."
However, it is these same people who scream that there is no middle class and that Republicans are just out for the rich. I always find it amusing how some people can talk out of both sides of their mouth.
Sorta like saying we support the troops, but not the war.
Ridiculous.
--PaulaV
Post a Comment