However, you will find my perspective on the impending funding issues that all of education seems to be tortuously awaiting.
With the inevitability of increased strain on districts and schools at every level, it is important to think about how the decisions of state and local ed agencies will impact the learning of students who fall into our "at-risk" categories.
Whatever cuts we are subject to, integrated and exceptional student services MUST NOT be included. This includes taking any budget reduction in special education, mental health, English language, and alternative programming off the table. The higher the strain placed on our capacity to create access to excellence for these student populations will only, in turn, increase the difficulty to meet the state and federal mandates for all of our students. The taxing nature of reduction in staff and services in these areas will not reduce the needs of the students. In fact it may do just the opposite. Yet a reduction of significant magnitude, as proposed at both federal and state levels, will place an aggregate burden on districts, and possibly more so on the communities in which they service. The struggle to compensate for lack of funding will only deepen the divide that exists for students with exceptionalities.
Current legislative initiatives, including rumored changes to the ESEA compel educators to "close the achievement gap". It is my belief that a reduction in funding to special education programs, and other valuable intervention initiatives will predictably decrease achievement in areas where we seek to increase it. The strain on the system would be tremendous.
We've written and implemented policies, directed emergent systems change, dictated agendas, and in so many places forced compliance. It's time that we begin to see the fruits of our labor, even if it comes in small portions.
Thanks for reading, please don't hesitate to share your thoughts too.
With the inevitability of increased strain on districts and schools at every level, it is important to think about how the decisions of state and local ed agencies will impact the learning of students who fall into our "at-risk" categories.
Whatever cuts we are subject to, integrated and exceptional student services MUST NOT be included. This includes taking any budget reduction in special education, mental health, English language, and alternative programming off the table. The higher the strain placed on our capacity to create access to excellence for these student populations will only, in turn, increase the difficulty to meet the state and federal mandates for all of our students. The taxing nature of reduction in staff and services in these areas will not reduce the needs of the students. In fact it may do just the opposite. Yet a reduction of significant magnitude, as proposed at both federal and state levels, will place an aggregate burden on districts, and possibly more so on the communities in which they service. The struggle to compensate for lack of funding will only deepen the divide that exists for students with exceptionalities.
Current legislative initiatives, including rumored changes to the ESEA compel educators to "close the achievement gap". It is my belief that a reduction in funding to special education programs, and other valuable intervention initiatives will predictably decrease achievement in areas where we seek to increase it. The strain on the system would be tremendous.
We've written and implemented policies, directed emergent systems change, dictated agendas, and in so many places forced compliance. It's time that we begin to see the fruits of our labor, even if it comes in small portions.
Thanks for reading, please don't hesitate to share your thoughts too.
Agreed! And let's not forget the importance of libraries and librarians in providing services to all students. Actually, if districts started rethinking how they allocate resources on wasteful expenditures like textbooks, course management software (there are GREAT free resources for this like Moodle), Software licenses that can easily be replaced with free products (Google Apps, okay $10), and providing 1-to-1, as opposed to supplementing the gaps in a BYOD program. Most districts wouldn't have to let anyone go. People teach people; stuff doesn't teach on its own.
ReplyDelete