Music Therapy & Related Issues

Advocacy Quotes

Hello everyone,

I ran across these two quotes by Thomas Sowell, who has written a couple of books on late talking children. He is a noted economist; not a therapist but he has some very good points. Certainly for those of us who are therapists, they bear thinking of. Kathleen
******************************************************************

"Experts of all sorts, whose money, careers and egos depend on their presumed superiority to parents--have every incentive to apply their theories and dogmas to children, dismissing first hand experiences of parents as mere laymen's illusions."

"While deficient parents do exist, so do deficient people in many fields who want to take over parent's decisions--WITHOUT taking over responsibility for the consequences."

Thomas Sowell

20 Steps to a Good IEP

20 STEPS TO A GOOD IEP

BEFORE THE MEETING:

1. Chart needs of your child that affect the child's ability to meet all of the school's expectations for a typical student, including transition successfully after public education

2. Examine all records relating to your child

3. Review last year's performance

4. Determine if additional evaluation is needed

5. Let the school know in writing before the IEP meeting what you want that will be different, and remind the school of their duty to reply in writing whether they will accept or refuse your proposal

6. Make sure the proper people will be at the IEP meeting

AT THE MEETING:

7. Object, on the record, to procedures that discourage parental participation, and consider re-scheduling the IEP meeting

8. Describe problems your child has that affect "educational" benefit

9. Set goals in each problem area, with appropriate consideration of transition

10. Select interim objectives

11. Set evaluation schedules and criteria for each objective and goal, including the parent role in assessing effectiveness

12. Develop the plan

13. Determine needed related services
14. List resources to be allocated

15. Examine contingencies, such as absence of key personnel or disciplinary infractions

16. Determine where the program will be carried out

17. Remove any unnecessary restrictiveness

18. Plan the transition component

AFTER THE MEETING:

19. Monitor progress

20. Prepare for the next IEP or call for the revision of the current one if there is a lack of expected progress toward the annual goals

Don't Take Sides on Inclusion

Don't Take Sides on Inclusion
------------------------------------------------
Summary: This is an amazing column. The author describes her journey from a
battle to keep her son mainstreamed in a regular classroom to the
realization that a specialized setting best served his needs. While she
would still prefer that inclusion would work for her child-- that all the
necessary funding and supports were in place-- until they are she recognizes
her child is better served in a special education setting.

By Marcie Roth
The Ragged Edge, September 2003

I have been fighting for children with disabilities to be able to receive a
free appropriate public education since before PL 94-142 -- now called the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA -- was passed, back in
1975. I have represented hundreds of families as they fought to get their
children that free appropriate public education in their neighborhood
school, in the classroom the child would have attended if they didn't have
a disability.

I have been active in the leadership of national organizations fighting for
inclusion. I've provided training and technical assistance to states,
communities, school districts and schools on exactly how to include
students with disabilities in general ed.

Funded by U. S. and the state department of education, I spent three years
in classrooms across my state, showing school teams how to include
students. I've been widely published on the topic of inclusion, and have
developed a number of tools that are in use today in general ed classrooms.
I can honestly say I've never met a child who can't successfully be
included, under the "right" circumstances, no matter what.

Yet last spring I put my 11-year-old son Dustin on a short bus and sent him
to a segregated school in another county at a cost of $50,000-plus per year
to the taxpayers of my community.

Shocking? You can only imagine.

I have been battling with our school system for four years to get Dustin
the educational supports and services he needs -- and is legally entitled
to -- without success. Despite intervention from the Maryland State
Department of Education, the U. S. Department of Education, Congress, the
White House, and even a superbly honest article by reporter Jay Mathews
that ran in the Feb. 6 Washington Post, Dustin's Individualized Education
Plan -- his "IEP" -- was never implemented. Not for one day.
This is not just my view of things, but the actual "Findings" from the
Maryland State Department of Education. (I have four such "Letters of
Findings.") No behavior support plan, no keyboarding, no extra set of books
for home, inadequate testing, outright lies. And then there was the abuse,
also honestly portrayed in the Washington Post.

Despite it all, rather than implement Dustin's IEP, as required by law, my
school system decided they "couldn't" serve him. They wanted him placed in
a segregated school, in another county.

I was fortunate, though. Because of our high profile (and the Washington
Post article), I was able to reject the hellholes they tried to send Dustin
to (where 4-point restraint and timeout rooms are still in use), and
managed to get him into a truly wonderful school, as segregated schools go.

In less than two weeks, my previously devastated child began to blossom. I
have never seen him as proud as he was when he signed his name to a gift
for his grandparents. He looked at me, beaming, and said "Look what the OT
taught me to do!" Dustin was supposed to have received occupational therapy
services as far back as 1998, but it took until now for it to actually happen.

I bet you're wondering why I didn't take legal action to force implementation of the IEP. I tried. I did as much as I could. A few wonderful people stepped up to help me, but I was unable to afford the legal battle I needed to fight, and I was well aware that even with adequate resources to spend on a lawsuit ($50,000 or more), I was likely to lose anyway. There are very few legal resources for people like me. Just
last year, I spent $8,000 out of pocket, paying expenses for professional
experts to attend meetings -- professionals I would have needed to use as
expert witnesses in a hearing had I pursued a lawsuit. This was in addition
to the $14,000 I spent out of pocket on co-pays for healthcare, after my
really decent health insurance paid its portion.

While I was struggling to pay experts to attend meeting after meeting, as I
fought for my child's right to an education, my school system was paying
lawyers $650 an hour or more to fight parents like me. Where did they get
that money to spend? Taxpayer dollars, of course! They used my taxpayer
dollars -- yours, too -- against my child.

Dustin's neighborhood school should be able to include him. But they have
proven that they have neither the will nor the way to do it. I am a staunch
inclusionist who now says: you're wasting your breath on that argument.

My new friends -- parents of kids in segregated schools -- will fight to
the death to keep these segregated schools -- until we can be guaranteed
that "inclusion" will not hurt our children.

I am far more aware than most that it really is possible to get inclusion
right. I'm also far more aware than most of just how wrong "inclusion" is
when it's not right.

My child will no longer pay a price for my ideology. He's paying a
different price right now -- the price of being segregated from his
non-disabled peers. I get to live with the guilt of allowing this.
Supporting it, even.

If you want to be part of the solution, don't take sides on inclusion. Put
your energy toward demanding full implementation and enforcement of IDEA.
Until our children are assured that the law will really be implemented and
enforced, the rest of the debate is irrelevant.

Marcie Roth is executive director of the National Spinal Cord Injury
Association and a longtime national disability rights advocate.

No Cow Left Behind/School Testing

No Cow Left Behind

Written by a local principal and appeared in the
Burlington Free Press (Vermont) on 7/25/03.

As a principal facing the task of figuring out all the complexities of
the No Child Left Behind legislation and its impact on education, I
have decided that there is a strong belief that testing students is
the answer to bringing about improvements in student performance.

Since testing seems to be a cornerstone to improving performance, I
don't understand why this principle isn't applied to other businesses
that are not performing up to expectations. I was thinking about the
problem of falling milk prices and wondering why testing cows wouldn't be effective in bringing up prices since testing students is going to bring up test scores.

The federal government should mandate testing all cows every year
starting at age 2. Now, I know that it will take time out of the
farmers' necessary work to do this testing every year and that it may
be necessary to spend inordinate amounts of money on the testing
equipment, but that should not detract us from what must be done.

I'm sure there are plenty of statistics to show what good milk
producing performance looks like and the characteristics of cows who achieve this level of performance. It should, therefore, be easy to figure out the characteristics necessary to meet this standard.

We will begin our testing by finding out which cows now meet the
standard, which almost meet the standard, which meet the standard with honors and which show little evidence of achievement.

Points will be assigned in each category and it will be necessary to
achieve a certain average score. If this score is not achieved, the
Department of Agriculture will send in experts to give advice for
improvement. If improvements do not occur over a couple of years, the state will take over your farm or even force you to sell. Now, I'm sure farms have a mix of cows in the barn but it is important to
remember that every cow can meet the standard. There should be no exceptions and no excuses. I don't want to hear about the cows that just came to the barn from the farm down the road that didn't provide the proper nutrition or a proper living environment. All cows need to meet the standard.

Another key factor will be the placement of a highly qualified farmer
in each barn. I know many of you have been farming for many years but it will be necessary for all farmers to become certified . This will
mean some more paperwork and testing on your knowledge of cows, but in the end this will lead to the benefit of all.

It will also be necessary to allow barn choice for the cows. If cows
are not meeting the standard in certain farms, they will be allowed to go to the barn of their choice. Transportation might become an issue but it is critical that cows be allowed to leave their low-performing barns. This will force low-performing farms to meet the standard or else they will simply go out of business. Some small farms will probably go out of business as a result of this new legislation.

Simply put, the cost per cow is too high. As taxpayers, we cannot be expected to foot the bill to subsidize farms with dairy compacts. Even though no one really knows what the ideal cost is to keep cows content, the Legislature will set a cost per cow. Expenditures too far above this cost will be penalized. Since everyone knows that there are economies of scale, small farms will probably be forced to close and those cows will merge into larger farms.

Some farmers may be upset that I proclaim to know what is best for
these cows but I certainly consider myself capable of making these
recommendations. I grew up next to a farm and I drink milk.

I hope you will consider this advice in the spirit it is given and I
hope you will agree that the "no cow left behind" legislation may not
be best for a small state like Vermont.