Scientists fear MMR link to autism
April 17, 2010
By SALLY BECK, Mail on Sunday
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-388051/Scientists-fear-MMR-link-autism.html
New American research shows that there could be a link between the
controversial MMR triple vaccine and autism and bowel disease in children.
The study appears to confirm the findings of British doctor Andrew
Wakefield, who caused a storm in 1998 by suggesting a possible link.
Now a team from the Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North
Carolina are examining 275 children with regressive autism and bowel
disease - and of the 82 tested so far, 70 prove positive for the measles
virus.
Last night the team’s leader, Dr Stephen Walker, said: ‘Of the handful
of results we have in so far, all are vaccine strain and none are wild
measles.
‘This research proves that in the gastrointestinal tract of a number of
children who have been diagnosed with regressive autism, there is
evidence of measles virus.
‘What it means is that the study done earlier by Dr Wakefield and
published in 1998 is correct. That study didn’t draw any conclusions
about specifically what it means to find measles virus in the gut, but
the implication is it may be coming from the MMR vaccine. If that’s the
case, and this live virus is residing in the gastrointestinal tract of
some children, and then they have GI inflammation and other problems, it
may be related to the MMR.’
The 1998 study by Dr Wakefield, then a reader in gastroenterology at the
Royal Free Hospital in North London, and 12 other doctors claimed to
have found a new bowel disease, autism enterocolitis.
At the time, Dr Wakefield said that although they had not proved a link
between MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) and autism, there was cause for
concern and the Government should offer the option single vaccines -
instead of only MMRs - until more research had been done.
The paper - and the confused interpretation of its findings - caused
uproar and led to many parents withdrawing their co-operation for the
triple jab. Ten of the paper’s authors also signed retractions on the
interpretation but stood by the science.
This is the second independent study to back up Dr Wakefield. In 2001
John O’Leary, Professor of Pathology at St James’s Hospital and Trinity
College, Dublin, replicated his findings.
Last night Dr Wakefield said: ‘This new study confirms what we found in
British children and again with Professor O’Leary. The only exposure
these children have had to measles is through the MMR vaccine.
‘They were developing normally until they regressed. They now suffer
autism and bowel disease.
‘The Department of Health and some of the media wanted to dismiss our
research as insignificant. The excuse was that no one else had the same
findings as us. What they didn’t say is that no one else had looked.’
A spokesman for the Department of Health said they had not read the
American report, but added: ‘MMR remains the best form of protection
against measles, mumps and rubella.’
sharing a post from john elder robison - cure or embrace?
April 12, 2010
http://jerobison.blogspot.com/2010/04/i-am-autism-too-thoughts-on.html
Interesting blog, very difficult topic.
My personal experience. My 7 yo son knows that he has Aspergers. He thinks it’s a funny word: AssBurgers - what is AssBurgers, that isn’t a word! When I describe what Aspergers is, he says “no I don’t do that”, “no that doesn’t sound like me at all”. Because, of course, his view of the social world is different than my view of the social world. He doesn’t see it and he usually thinks he’s right. After all, one of the descriptors that I always use is how intelligent he is when it comes to visual memory, perceptual thinking, putting together complex puzzles, etc, etc. So if he’s so smart, how is that wrong? I don’t blame him for being confused.
And, when I bring up autism, he and his sister both agree that he in no way has autism - because they have personal experience with what classic and regressive autism look like. Yet, he goes to the Seattle Children’s Autism Center for therapy. This confuses him. He says he definitely does not have autism. His view of autism is that of the more significantly impacted. And, in their view, if they talk like typical speakers then he can’t have autism. It is very difficult to explain how it’s all the same spectrum. It’s easy to describe Aspergers and it’s easy to describe Autism, but all the in between is very difficult and it’s even difficult to show why they are on the same spectrum.
I definitely don’t want to cure my son. Am I providing him with opportunities to learn social skills, cognitive behavioral therapy to understand how his brain functions, to help him self identify and self manage, YES! And, he’s getting it. He’s picking up on the Michelle Garcia Winner’s Superflex curriculum brilliantly.
But he has the ability to communicate, he is very bright so he’s able to incorporate the teaching and the skills, we’re able to get the behaviors under control so that he can participate. Some don’t have these abilities. And I completely understand the need to unlock autism, or some would say, to cure it.
It really begs the question whether the changes to the DSMV should be made. It’s almost like we’re fighting two different fights. I mean where would we be if there weren’t people like Einstein, Mozart, Lewis Carroll, Andy Warhol, Thomas Jefferson, and Bill Gates. I don’t want to cure Aspergers because they are potentially the person who will unlock autism.
Personal History: Parallel Play: newyorker.com
April 10, 2010
Personal History: Parallel Play: newyorker.com.
Betting on the Blind Side Business: vanityfair.com
April 6, 2010
Interesting read about Michael Burry and Aspergers
Betting on the Blind Side Business: vanityfair.com.
Arthur® Explores Asperger’s Syndrome
April 4, 2010
New character in April 5 episode
http://www.autism-society.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=15923
Patient Voices: Autism
April 4, 2010
The autism-spectrum disorders encompass a wide range of symptoms, from social awkwardness to a complete inability to interact and communicate. Here, six men and women speak about living with an autism-spectrum disorder.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/04/02/health/healthguide/TE_autism.html
what every parent must know - the early signs of autism are NOT necessarily the early signs of aspergers - autism awareness day is April 2nd!
April 1, 2010
Do you wonder why your child seems to be much more difficult than other children? Do your child’s tantrums seem to last much longer and be much more explosive than other children their age? Is your child exhibiting signs of intelligence much past his developmental age? Does your child obsess over certain objects, can focus on a particular item of interest for days or months, or need to collect items he’s interested in? Does your child have remarkable memory, especially for details? Does he seem to be inflexible, more difficult to make transitions? Is he having trouble learning in one or more areas, despite his intelligence? Maybe he is having a more difficult time getting along with other children? Or, seems overly disturbed when walking into a crowded or loud room? Does your child seem to be more emotional than other children? Does your child like talking to strangers, like being the center of attention, is he chatty and sometimes doesn’t know when he’s said too much?
In light of World Autism Awareness Day, I want to do my part to raise awareness of the signs of autism. There are a lot of children (and adults, but for this purpose I’m referring to children) out there undiagnosed. And while I do not necessarily think the diagnosis is essential, I do believe there are key things a parent can learn through the diagnosis process that will immensely help their children succeed in life. I talk about this in one of my earlier blogs.
There is a lot of media attention on autism these days, which is absolutely terrific. However, the media doesn’t make much mention of Aspergers and how that looks different from autism. Aspergers is an autism spectrum disorder but many of the early signs of Aspergers are different from those of autism. Because of this, doctors and parents often are not able to diagnosis a child with Aspergers until much later, missing those key early intervention years - below the age of 5.
We have a lot of autism in our family. I knew the signs of classic autism. My son, who has Aspergers, exhibited NONE of these signs. In fact, in some areas, he was the complete opposite - like, he loves to snuggle, he is very animated in his expression, he initiates and carries on conversations. So, we thought “there is no way he has autism”. He said his first words at 6 months, walked at 8 months, and could tell you how electricity worked by the age of 2. How is it possible for someone with this kind of advanced development have autism?
I googled “signs of autism” and here are the top 3 sites that I found:
Mayo Clinic’s signs of autism:
- Fails to respond to his or her name
- Has poor eye contact
- Appears not to hear you at times
- Resists cuddling and holding
- Appears unaware of others’ feelings
- Seems to prefer playing alone — retreats into his or her “own world”
- Starts talking later than other children
- Loses previously acquired ability to say words or sentences
- Does not make eye contact when making requests
- Speaks with an abnormal tone or rhythm — may use a singsong voice or robot-like speech
- Can’t start a conversation or keep one going
- May repeat words or phrases verbatim, but doesn’t understand how to use them
- Performs repetitive movements, such as rocking, spinning or hand-flapping
- Develops specific routines or rituals
- Becomes disturbed at the slightest change in routines or rituals
- Moves constantly
- May be fascinated by parts of an object, such as the spinning wheels of a toy car
- May be unusually sensitive to light, sound and touch and yet oblivious to pain
Autism Speaks signs of autism:
- No big smiles or other warm, joyful expressions by six months or thereafter
- No back-and-forth sharing of sounds, smiles, or other facial expressions by nine months or thereafter
- No babbling by 12 months
- No back-and-forth gestures, such as pointing, showing, reaching, or waving by 12 months
- No words by 16 months
- No two-word meaningful phrases (without imitating or repeating) by 24 months
- Any loss of speech or babbling or social skills at any age
About.com signs of autism:
- Does not babble, point, or make meaningful gestures by 1 year of age
- Does not speak one word by 16 months
- Does not combine two words by 2 years
- Does not respond to name
- Loses language or social skills
- Poor eye contact
- Doesn’t seem to know how to play with toys
- Excessively lines up toys or other objects
- Is attached to one particular toy or object
- Doesn’t smile
- At times seems to be hearing impaired
Everyone that knows my son, and I would bet that this is true for a lot of folks with Aspergers, did not show these signs. He did have poor eye contact, he was inflexible with unexpected changes, and he had extreme interests in certain objects. But, THAT’S IT! And, this could be any kid. Believe me, in this journey of autism, there is nothing I would have liked more than to have his diagnosis at age 2 or 3. I CANNOT STRESS ENOUGH, IF YOU QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON WITH YOUR CHILD, IF YOU THINK THAT HE IS DIFFERENT IN SOME WAY, - GO GET HIM (OR HER) EVALUATED!!! DO IT NOW! A diagnosis is very difficult and scary. But you will be so glad you did it after several years have passed. And it is what is best for your child. There are so many great resources today to help your child live a successful life - but early diagnosis and intervention is BEST. And, if you need help accessing resources, there are a ton of us parents out there to help guide you - and we are all happy to do so!
From my google search, WebMD does the best job at describing the signs of Aspergers, but many of these signs can’t be detected until later ages when you can really assess their social development. Listen to the questions I raise at the beginning of this post.
from WebMD:
Parents often first notice the symptoms of Asperger’s syndrome when their child starts preschool and begins to interact with other children. Children with Asperger’s syndrome may:
- Not pick up on social cues and may lack inborn social skills, such as being able to read others’ body language, start or maintain a conversation, and take turns talking.
- Dislike any changes in routines.
- Appear to lack empathy.
- Be unable to recognize subtle differences in speech tone, pitch, and accent that alter the meaning of others’ speech. Thus, your child may not understand a joke or may take a sarcastic comment literally. Likewise, his or her speech may be flat and difficult to understand because it lacks tone, pitch, and accent.
- Have a formal style of speaking that is advanced for his or her age. For example, the child may use the word “beckon” instead of “call” or the word “return” instead of “come back.”
- Avoid eye contact or stare at others.
- Have unusual facial expressions or postures.
- Be preoccupied with only one or few interests, which he or she may be very knowledgeable about. Many children with Asperger’s syndrome are overly interested in parts of a whole or in unusual activities, such as designing houses, drawing highly detailed scenes, or studying astronomy. They may show an unusual interest in certain topics such as snakes, names of stars, or dinosaurs.2
- Talk a lot, usually about a favorite subject. One-sided conversations are common. Internal thoughts are often verbalized.
- Have delayed motor development. Your child may be late in learning to use a fork or spoon, ride a bike, or catch a ball. He or she may have an awkward walk. Handwriting is often poor.
- Have heightened sensitivity and become overstimulated by loud noises, lights, or strong tastes or textures. For more information about these symptoms, see sensory integration dysfunction.
A child with one or two of these symptoms does not necessarily have Asperger’s syndrome. To be diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, a child must have a combination of these symptoms and severe trouble with social situations.
Although the condition is in some ways similar to autism, a child with Asperger’s syndrome typically has normal language and intellectual development. Also, those with Asperger’s syndrome typically make more of an effort than those with autism to make friends and engage in activities with others.
it is all worth it - this journey
March 30, 2010
I have been through a whirlwind the past few months. But now that I’ve come out the other end, I can definitely say “it was all worth it”. All of the work that I’ve put in to my children has finally felt like it’s paying off. It’s been 2 and a half years since my son’s diagnosis. Having known what “autism” was because of family members severely impacted, I thought my son would be diagnosed with ADHD. He did not have any of the signs of autism. So the Aspergers diagnosis was a surprise, punch in the gut. Another punch to the gut was having the University of Washington diagnose him and then say “they have no services for families, call FEATWA, and good luck to you”. Then further punch to the gut was being told by his private school that he couldn’t come back because he had been diagnosed with autism. Even further punches were the visits to the only other school choice being the public school’s autism program where, on our tour, observed a child with autism being dragged down the hall by his armpits simply because he was tired. One saving grace along the way was the private school asking him to stay and for us to help them establish a program for kids like him. But further punches were him not having success at the school, largely because their model just isn’t for learning differences and the teachers are untrained in this area, and it really wasn’t a “program” they were starting and they were getting political pressures for wanting to do so. The biggest punch of all, however, was the massive regression I saw my son go through in a classroom that wasn’t working for him. THIS WAS HARD. And, this made me finally put on the real fighting gloves and I punched back – knocking back that regressive behavior and not allowing autism to be a detriment to my son!
But it hasn’t been easy. I had to take time off from my professional career, which is not easy for me. I reached out to the professionals that I know , asked lots of questions, researched everything they suggested, and sought out answers. But I also got lucky. As luck would have it, I found a friend who is an autism education expert and 3 major resources became available to us this year, and I’ve talked about these in my blogs before. The UW Autism Center started providing services to families, the Seattle Children’s Autism Center was formed, and the Academy for Precision Learning recruited an acclaimed Principal to allow their school to become the premier school for inclusive education for individuals with autism. Boy did we get lucky and the stars aligned.
After two months in his second grade classroom (from the beginning of September to the beginning of November), he regressed to a point that I’d never seen him. By November, he was hooked up to new treatment providers – new behavioral consultant, new Aspergers psychologist, new psychiatrist – some of the best too. By January, he (and his sister) were moved to a new school – Academy for Precision Learning. By March, he had more assessments completed and was fully engaged in a social skills group for anxiety, cognitive behavioral therapy utilizing the work of Michelle Garcia Winner, and a sibling social skills group with his sister. All of this is ongoing and is a work in progress. But, my son is back!
And, we’ve discovered some wonderful things about my daughter along the way as well. I’ll blog about her one of these days! I’ll also share more about the autism centers and the new school over the coming weeks.
But I have to be sure to make this point. It isn’t that any of the providers or schools or teachers that we’ve worked with in the past were not good. It’s just that if you don’t have all of those things working together in unison and if you don’t have properly trained professionals, then the program is flawed. I know there is a tendency for people who have worked with my son in the past to feel that this blog is a punch in the gut. It isn’t meant to be. I blog because someone out there has a child like mine and can benefit from what I’ve learned. It’s very important for me to make sense out of my experiences and to try to help others either not make the same mistakes I’ve made or to benefit from knowledge I’ve gained. Everyone who has worked with my son has been caring and has given him all that they had to offer.
With all of the regression gone, we can move forward. Moving onward! It’s a journey!
Picket - New DSM does Disservice to Patients with Asperger’s
March 10, 2010
Picket - New DSM does Disservice to Patients with Asperger’s.
I liked this blog. I like hearing all of the sides to this issue. Based on how services and education exist today, what this blogger is saying is absolutely true. What services and education will be like in three years, when the new DSM goes into effect, who knows. There is more to it than this, but this is a good viewpoint.
Seattle Special Ed PTSA Position Paper - very well done
February 26, 2010
Seeking More Inclusive Educational Services
Mission Statement: The Seattle Special Education PTSA is dedicated to assisting families of students with disabilities as they navigate the educational system, partnering with parents and educators as we advocate for improvements in special education, and building bridges between the general and special education communities to bring increased educational resources and opportunities for all students.
Executive Summary
Our PTSA endorses the inclusive concepts and vision of Integrated Comprehensive Services (ICS), the new model of special education service delivery that Seattle Public Schools is attempting to implement. The ICS model is intended to provide children the services indicated on their Individualized Education Plan (IEP) in general education classrooms in schools closer to home to the maximum extent possible. However, the components needed to implement ICS well are too weak or missing, resulting in some children not getting the services they need and not meeting with success. The net result has been to make the district move away – rather than toward – more inclusive educational practices.
After observing and participating in the new model for the past five months, we judge that the district has no shared vision, no authoritative leadership, and a lack of adequate resources to provide truly inclusive educational services. Although Executive Director of Special Education Services Marni Campbell has embraced the vision of inclusive education and represents that vision on the Superintendent’s leadership team, she is not sufficiently empowered to hold personnel accountable at the school level. Members of the central office special education staff show little commitment to inclusive services; some are not knowledgeable regarding ICS or lack the skills to promote its effective implementation, some are incompetent, and some are just waiting for ICS to go away. Moreover, Instructional Directors, Principals, teachers, and instructional assistants do not understand or share the vision of inclusive services, and general educators in particular have not taken ownership of the notion that it is their responsibility to teach to all learners.
The move to more inclusive education calls for a fundamental transformation of general education in Seattle. Overlaying a new model on an old system is inadequate. “The school district’s special education service delivery model must be dramatically overhauled with the emphasis on high expectations, inclusive educational practices, rigorous curriculum, differentiated instruction, and the development of a dynamic continuum of learning supports.”1 All district components need to share the vision of inclusive education and implement it, particularly along the general education chain of command. Although such a transformation in culture and practice takes time and resources, models exist now in the district’s inclusion programs and should serve as the foundation for ICS.
The following contains a discussion of our concerns and recommendations for measures the district should take to implement truly inclusive educational services.
1 Special Education: Organizational, Program, and Service Delivery Review – Seattle Public Schools: A Report of the External Core Team,” Urban Special Education Leadership Collaborative Education Development Center, Inc. October 2007.
2
Discussion
Integrated Comprehensive Services (ICS) is a service-based model and, as designed by then-interim Director of Special Education Services Fred Row and then-Chief Academic Officer Carla Santorno, will eventually replace Seattle’s program-based model. The move to ICS flowed from the recommendations made by the outside audit of Seattle’s special education services completed in October 2007. In a Parent Communicator dated Feb. 12, 2009, the district said: “In an Integrated Service delivery model, both special and general educators at a specific grade level work together to support students with a range of differing needs. Such supports are based on the significance of a specific learning; they range from team-taught large group instruction, to co-planned, small, flexible learning groups, to one-to-one instruction in integrated school and community environments. In an integrated and comprehensive services model, students are placed in classes according to their natural proportions in the school. Assigning students in natural proportions sets the expectation that all school staff be able to teach to a range of students. The role of the special education teacher is initially to support students in these settings, but ultimately to build the general educator’s capacity to teach to a range of students.” (Emphasis added.) http://www.seattleschools.org/area/speced/parentcommunicator.pdf The district informed school staff members on April 10, 2009: “Comprehensive Integrated Services provided to buildings will depend on the students that enroll in each building and may look different between schools. Services will be based on the level of support individual students need. Enhanced support could include additional certificated teacher time, instructional assistant support, specialized materials and equipment, etc. Again, please note that students will not be placed in buildings if we are unable to provide the resources and staff support required to meet students’ needs. We will not be able to determine specific needs until the enrollment period closes and we review individual student applications. Please know that you will NOT be asked to serve students in a less restrictive setting without adequate resources!” (Emphasis added.)
Starting in September 2009, the ICS model was put in place for about 70 children in kindergarten and first grade in some 38 schools; existing inclusion programs were still available in grades 2 and above but slated to phase out over the next 3-5 years. The new model seems to work best in schools that received only one or two children with “mild” disabilities or in schools where the teachers and staff collaborate well and have formed teams to design creative, flexible service delivery methods. However, in some schools where more children enrolled under this model and/or had more complicated disabilities, problems occurred. In particular, students with Autism Spectrum disorders who formerly would have been served in an Autism Inclusion Program did not receive appropriate services and, in some cases, received punishment for exhibiting their behavioral disabilities. (Please see our report on a PTSA survey of families, Addendum A, for more information.)
Both our PTSA and SEAAC leaders meet on a monthly basis with the SPS Executive Director of Special Education Services Marni Campbell and appreciate the opportunity to discuss frankly the issues our members — including some teachers — have raised with us. Ms. Campbell is an enthusiastic, hard-working advocate of more inclusive services and has been proactive in addressing some of the concerns we have raised. However, there continues to be a disconnect between what the district outlines and what is happening in some schools and, although the district says some of the issues our members have raised with us are isolated cases, we view them as individual children falling through the cracks.
3
We are concerned that these cases point to systemic problems that will only grow as the ICS model is rolled out in more grades and more schools next year, resulting in more children falling through the cracks.
The deficiencies in ICS appear to stem largely from a lack of accountability, untrained or incompetent teachers/administrators, inadequate ratios of teachers to students, and the lack of a true continuum of services as mandated by federal law. In addition, the district’s failure to leverage school building strengths and proactively remedy building weaknesses is also to blame.
Accountability – Although the new model was designed and rolled out by the Special Education Services department, that department has no authority over principals and building staff. District Instructional Directors, who have direct authority over school building personnel, do not appear to be engaged in actively promoting a collaborative approach toward providing special education services nor aware of best practices in inclusive education. The evaluation process for principals and staff does not address how special education services are provided and their impact on student progress. Principal/staff decisions at two schools were overturned only when parents filed complaints or went through an appeal process; these cases were not addressed adequately or expeditiously at the district level.
The October 2007 external audit said, “Ownership and accountability for the education of students with disabilities must be a system priority, not a special education department priority alone..the system must have an agreed-upon set of non-negotiables with regard to school’s adherence to standards of law and best practices.” This statement remains true today.
Inexperience/Incompetence – In some cases, building administrators/staff and central office consulting teachers/supervisors have mismanaged the provision of services to children in the ICS model or misstated legal and/or procedural requirements. Kindergarteners and first graders have been suspended for behavior issues even though their disability included behavior disorders and they were not accorded services outlined in their IEP or Behavior Intervention Plan. School administrators, staff, and even central office personnel lack direct training on key provisions of federal legislation such as IDEA or 504 and make assertions that are in error about compliance issues or placement decisions. In addition, school staff members lack expertise on a variety of disability categories including provision of social skills training, positive behavior supports, and Autism Spectrum Disorders. Although the district is providing training in some of these areas, it is not mandated and appears limited in its effectiveness especially when time for planning and collaboration is in short supply.
The October 2007 external audit said, “The overall quality of special education services must be enhanced through professional development of special education and related services personnel, as well as general education leaders…the onus of student failure must be on the school, and any student failure must be viewed as something that is askew in the education system.” This statement remains true today.
Ratios – The new model was implemented with existing program ratios, which are set in the collective bargaining agreement with SEA, and the result has been separate and unequal delivery in regard to both the quality and quantity of special education services.
4
ICS students are served by a Resource Room teacher whose ratio is 1:22 (one special ed teacher; 22 students); additional support from an instructional assistant is often allocated. In contrast, children still in inclusion programs have much more favorable ratios. Specifically, Low Incidence A Inclusion has a ratio of 1:1:9 (one special ed teacher; one instructional assistant; nine students), and Autism Inclusion has a ratio of 1:2:8 (one special ed teacher; two instructional assistants; eight students). Up until this year, Resource Room teachers generally served children with learning disabilities in small math and reading groups in the Resource Room. Now, some Resource Room teachers have caseloads that are full or above the 1:22 ratio with some of those children requiring more intensive services to be provided in the general education classroom. Although the district has provided more resources to buildings with overloaded Resource Room teachers, parents report that these resources are in the form of Instructional Assistants or ICS Coaches with inadequate skills and/or itinerant schedules.
The October 2007 external audit said, “In such a model, the ratio of students to staff is based purely on numbers rather than on the needs of students…Although a significant change in service delivery, one that may affect contractual agreements, is difficult, we would be negligent to not expect it as a result of this analysis.” (Emphasis added.) This statement remains true today.
Lack of a Continuum – The uneven implementation of ICS means that, in many cases, families are given a choice of their child attending school in a general education classroom with inadequate services/support or being placed in a self-contained classroom. Federal law requires that school districts provide a full continuum of services for students with disabilities and provide those services in the Least Restrictive Environment: “to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities…are educated with children who are not disabled.” Seattle currently lacks a continuum of services in many schools. Some families with children in ICS classrooms are being told that the school cannot provide the level of service needed by their child in the general education classroom and that their child will need to be placed in a self-contained setting. What happened to the district’s promise of “co-planned, small, flexible learning groups…one-to-one instruction in integrated school and community environments”? In fact, the district has told families of new elementary risers that their options for the 2010-11 school year are Resource Room, Resource Room with ICS, or Self-Contained services. “Inclusion” programs are only offered to elementary children in grades 2-5. Furthermore, the plan is to progressively phase out “inclusion” programs and replace that service delivery model with ICS.
The October 2007 external audit said, “Students with disabilities have an equal right to content-based instruction within the general education environment…Both special and general education teachers must use flexible heterogeneous grouping patterns throughout the day, depending on the instructional content and student needs.” This statement remains true today.
The deficiencies enumerated above speak to the failure to leverage school building strengths and proactively remedy building weaknesses. Some schools have demonstrated creative methods of staffing and teaming to teach to a range of learners. Many dedicated educators reside in our schools and seek to improve their skill base to serve our children better. Moreover, the district has a pool of expertise on inclusion practices — including schools where inclusion is working well — and needs to build on this foundation.
5
The Inclusion Programs, which Seattle Public Schools is gradually phasing out as ICS is phased in, are a good model for inclusive services and should be propagated – not eliminated — throughout the district for children with a range of disabilities. The inclusion programs provide children with disabilities the opportunity to participate in general education classrooms to the greatest extent possible while still providing them with needed supports. Children in these programs have special education teachers who have expertise in their disability. These teachers are able to implement strategies, provide support, modify instructional materials, and make recommendations on accommodations to the general educator teacher. Children currently in ICS need the supports afforded to children in inclusion programs while children in self-contained classrooms need the opportunity to access general education curriculum with their “typical” peers. A truly inclusive service delivery model would produce such a continuum.
In these tough economic times, it is easy to say “we just don’t have the funding to provide the resources needed” for truly inclusive services; however, it is wrong. Federal law mandates that students with disabilities receive special education services alongside their peers to the greatest extent possible; this is not happening now in Seattle Public Schools. Inclusive education is not fundamentally a change in special education; it is fundamentally a change in general education – all children will benefit. The October 2007 external audit said, “In the aggregate, the External Core Team’s recommendations are far-reaching and require a dramatic shift in the way in which many Seattle educators currently view students with disabilities, special education, and the supports that students with and without disabilities need in order to succeed…while a beginning has been made, there is an urgency to accelerating the adoption and implementation of next steps.” This statement remains true today.
Recommendations
The October 2007 external audit said, “School district and building-level leaders must forcefully and consistently challenge this culture (of low expectations for students receiving special education services); without a change of expectation, all other school district efforts to improve outcomes for students with disabilities and for other traditionally marginalized groups of students will have minimal impact.”
To this statement, which remains true today, we would add the following recommendations for specific measures that the district should take to move Seattle closer to truly inclusive educational services: The Special Education Services department needs to be a key link in the chain of command with regard to building personnel and policy decisions. The Special Education Services department needs to engage in more dialogue with teachers and staff at the building level to deepen the understanding of inclusive practices and to seek input with regard to the perceived impediments to such practices at each school. Instructional Directors should be participants in this process. The manner in which special education services are provided and their impact on student progress need to be part of the evaluation process for principals and staff. Mandatory professional development specifically addressing IDEA and 504 requirements should be provided as soon as possible. Mandatory professional development on the range of disability categories served by our schools should be implemented on a priority basis.
6
The Special Education Services department should be a repository of expertise on specific disabilities and the appropriate interventions to employ in the school setting. In addition, the Special Education Services department should be a repository of expertise on the legal and procedural requirements of federal and state law regarding individuals with disabilities. The district should establish a well-designed and responsive system for allocating more certificated special education staff when that support is necessary. Training and hiring practices must ensure that Instructional Assistants are qualified for their jobs. Ratios should not be determined by collective bargaining. They should be determined by the level of service needed by each child at the school. Instead of 1:22 for Resource Room/ICS, the ratio should be closer to the 1:10 ratio recommended by the outside audit of Seattle’s special education services commissioned by the Superintendent in 2007. Ideally, there should be a formula that determines the ratio needed based on the services indicated on the IEP of each student attending a particular school. Collective bargaining could define or place parameters on such a formula. The district should deliver the model promised in February 2009 by providing a range of practices from team-taught large group instruction to co-planned, small flexible learning groups, to one-to-one instruction in integrated school and community environments. ICS should support students up to and including the level of support provided to students under the inclusion models that are being phased out. Funds to support better ratios and expertise-building are essential and any consideration of funding cuts to the most vulnerable of our students is unacceptable.
