CSign
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 3,279
- Reaction score
- 1
This is the kind of nonsense parents are up against every step of the way. I am no longer surprised by these kinds of egregious acts...
Special ed teachers say e-mail broke law - SFGate
"A San Francisco Unified School District administrator raised the possibility of not offering summer school to some special education students as a way to cut costs, a move that special education teachers and attorneys say violates federal*law.
Lisa Miller, the district's head of middle school special education, said in a Jan. 4 e-mail to her staff that the cost of summer school had become "exorbitant" and told special education staffers at middle schools not to authorize it without her*approval.
"I am asking that all middle school special education staff consult with me PRIOR TO authorizing/offering" summer school, she wrote in the e-mail, which was obtained by the Bay*Citizen.
The directive appears to violate the federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, which requires each child's special education plan to be agreed upon by the student's family, educators and disability experts, not district administrators. The law also prohibits districts from denying student services based on*cost.
'Tracking*costs'
Miller wrote that she would be reviewing summer school offers in students' individualized education programs - contracts between the district and families detailing agreed-upon services - and in some cases "asking for*corrections."
"I do apologize for the strong tone of this e-mail," she wrote, "yet I am responsible for tracking*costs."
James Galgano, a San Francisco special education teacher who received the e-mail, said he had "printed it out and sent it back to her with a handwritten note saying, 'This violates the*law.' "
District officials declined to comment on Miller's e-mail.
Miller sent the message while the state Department of Education was conducting an audit of the district's special education practices last school year. Although unaware of Miller's e-mail, the auditors concluded that San Francisco schools had improperly denied services to some children. The state has yet to tabulate how many students were*affected.
Colleague*surprised
Donna DeMartini, an education program specialist for the department who participated in the audit, said she was surprised by Miller's*directive.
"It's something you would not put in writing because it's against the federal regulations," she said. "You cannot use cost. That's not a (criterion) for providing*services."
Thousands of San Francisco special education students depend on summer classes, including reading instruction, speech and language therapy, and physical and behavioral support. A lack of year-round services can jeopardize their chances of moving into mainstream classes and graduating from high school on*time.
Miller's e-mail outraged some teachers and advocates for special education students who have long complained that California schools have been quietly cutting costs illegally to save*money.
"Districts always claim to not make decisions about services to students with disabilities based upon cost," said Katy Franklin, head of the district's Community Advisory Committee for Special Education. "But this e-mail clearly illustrates that cost was the driving factor behind a concerted, deliberate push to deny services to students with*disabilities."
Official's*defense
Miller declined interview requests, but wrote in an e-mail to the Bay Citizen that the 151-word note to teachers and staff had been "taken out of context" and was part of an effort to train her staff to authorize summer services only when*appropriate.
"In order to assure the highest quality services are provided with the limited funding that is available," summer school should not "automatically be provided" to special education students, she*wrote.
Miller added that no student's special education plan had been changed*improperly.
According to the district, 2,695 students were authorized for summer school services this year as part of their individualized education programs, known as IEPs, up from 2,516 in*2011.
"By law, the IEP reigns supreme, and it's not the district that writes the IEP," said Susan Solomon, executive vice president of United Educators of San Francisco. "If everyone on an IEP team recommends a service, it's not because they think the district needs to spend more money, it's because it's what the child*needs."
'A money*issue'
Jamie Sheldon, a special education teacher at Dr. Martin Luther King Academic Middle School, said the district began offering summer school to fewer students with learning disabilities after Miller met with teachers last*spring.
"Lisa talked about which students needed services and which didn't, and she did talk about it being a money issue," Sheldon said. "It was my impression that if you felt a student needed (summer school), you had to pass that on to her so she could OK*it."
Laura Faer, education rights director at Public Counsel Law Center, said such impressions were damaging to students'*educations.
"When a letter like this comes from a supervisor at the district level, staff will not be helping an individual child and creating a plan," she said. "Rather, they will be concerned that that district will crack down on them if they don't conserve*money."
Special ed teachers say e-mail broke law - SFGate
"A San Francisco Unified School District administrator raised the possibility of not offering summer school to some special education students as a way to cut costs, a move that special education teachers and attorneys say violates federal*law.
Lisa Miller, the district's head of middle school special education, said in a Jan. 4 e-mail to her staff that the cost of summer school had become "exorbitant" and told special education staffers at middle schools not to authorize it without her*approval.
"I am asking that all middle school special education staff consult with me PRIOR TO authorizing/offering" summer school, she wrote in the e-mail, which was obtained by the Bay*Citizen.
The directive appears to violate the federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, which requires each child's special education plan to be agreed upon by the student's family, educators and disability experts, not district administrators. The law also prohibits districts from denying student services based on*cost.
'Tracking*costs'
Miller wrote that she would be reviewing summer school offers in students' individualized education programs - contracts between the district and families detailing agreed-upon services - and in some cases "asking for*corrections."
"I do apologize for the strong tone of this e-mail," she wrote, "yet I am responsible for tracking*costs."
James Galgano, a San Francisco special education teacher who received the e-mail, said he had "printed it out and sent it back to her with a handwritten note saying, 'This violates the*law.' "
District officials declined to comment on Miller's e-mail.
Miller sent the message while the state Department of Education was conducting an audit of the district's special education practices last school year. Although unaware of Miller's e-mail, the auditors concluded that San Francisco schools had improperly denied services to some children. The state has yet to tabulate how many students were*affected.
Colleague*surprised
Donna DeMartini, an education program specialist for the department who participated in the audit, said she was surprised by Miller's*directive.
"It's something you would not put in writing because it's against the federal regulations," she said. "You cannot use cost. That's not a (criterion) for providing*services."
Thousands of San Francisco special education students depend on summer classes, including reading instruction, speech and language therapy, and physical and behavioral support. A lack of year-round services can jeopardize their chances of moving into mainstream classes and graduating from high school on*time.
Miller's e-mail outraged some teachers and advocates for special education students who have long complained that California schools have been quietly cutting costs illegally to save*money.
"Districts always claim to not make decisions about services to students with disabilities based upon cost," said Katy Franklin, head of the district's Community Advisory Committee for Special Education. "But this e-mail clearly illustrates that cost was the driving factor behind a concerted, deliberate push to deny services to students with*disabilities."
Official's*defense
Miller declined interview requests, but wrote in an e-mail to the Bay Citizen that the 151-word note to teachers and staff had been "taken out of context" and was part of an effort to train her staff to authorize summer services only when*appropriate.
"In order to assure the highest quality services are provided with the limited funding that is available," summer school should not "automatically be provided" to special education students, she*wrote.
Miller added that no student's special education plan had been changed*improperly.
According to the district, 2,695 students were authorized for summer school services this year as part of their individualized education programs, known as IEPs, up from 2,516 in*2011.
"By law, the IEP reigns supreme, and it's not the district that writes the IEP," said Susan Solomon, executive vice president of United Educators of San Francisco. "If everyone on an IEP team recommends a service, it's not because they think the district needs to spend more money, it's because it's what the child*needs."
'A money*issue'
Jamie Sheldon, a special education teacher at Dr. Martin Luther King Academic Middle School, said the district began offering summer school to fewer students with learning disabilities after Miller met with teachers last*spring.
"Lisa talked about which students needed services and which didn't, and she did talk about it being a money issue," Sheldon said. "It was my impression that if you felt a student needed (summer school), you had to pass that on to her so she could OK*it."
Laura Faer, education rights director at Public Counsel Law Center, said such impressions were damaging to students'*educations.
"When a letter like this comes from a supervisor at the district level, staff will not be helping an individual child and creating a plan," she said. "Rather, they will be concerned that that district will crack down on them if they don't conserve*money."
