Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Twice Exceptional Disabled students twice as likely to be suspended

Disabled students twice as likely to be suspended

I wonder what they'd see if they broke the data down by disability - I bet the kids in wheelchairs are not the ones being sent home.

Bringing this along to our start-of-school meeting. My son with autism has been put in detention or suspended every year. Thanks for sharing it.

I often cite the NYT, but many of its articles (and the academic research parroted by its reporters) are tendentious, including this one and a previous one

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/e...ce-more-harsh-discipline-data-shows.html
Black Students Face More Discipline, Data Suggests
By TAMAR LEWIN
March 6, 2012

I agree with the first "Reader Picks" comment at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/e...ipline-data-shows.html?comments#permid=7 .

I see kids with ADHD being disciplined a lot for infractions that they commit because they are impulsive.

Frankly, I think it's a miracle DS8 hasn't been suspended from school yet!

My DS8 hasn't been, but I think it's because I communicate a lot with his teachers with explanations for his behaviours, so they're prepared and compassionate. Also, he's a really sweet kid and very likable (phew )

DS9 (2e, AS) would have been suspended practically every year if it weren't for the protection he gets with his IEP. I think his record year was 6 pink slips for "bullying" -- what they call it when he gets upset and says whatever is on his mind, which is not nice. But with the IEP, he gets detention and other things instead of suspension.

Schools see an IEP and they automatically make assumptions: "bad kid", "not too bright", "classroom management problem". I was reminded of this this week, when my daughter's new high school assigned her to a "Learning Strategies" classroom on the basis of her possession of an IEP. At least, I assume that's why. I kind of doubt it was based on the fact that she has several high school credits already and a 4.33 GPA...

Well, at least DS9 has an ALP to go with his IEP and the school knows him all too well!

DD8 got sent to the office umpteen bazillion times last year; the two previous years, only a couple of times in the beginning of the year. The difference was a new teacher who didn't get DD at all, or care to work with her on her behavior. Although DD was not suspended, we were not allowed to go back to that school this year thanks to a concerted campaign by that teacher (even though I think with a different teacher it might have been fine). We were very disappointed to see this from an expensive private school where the gist of the marketing campaign is individual attention. Not that they should have to put up with just anything, of course, but it made sense to me to pay for a private school in hopes of getting that as well as possibly more experienced and kinder teachers. Not so. I'm not sure it would have worked better in public school with an IEP, but it could not have been any worse. I hope Angie's List or something starts tracking teachers for this kind of thing--it would be great to be able, ahead of time, to find teachers who might work best for 2e kids rather than just rolling the dice.

Dbat, it's sad, but lots of people send their kids to private schools expressly to keep them away from kids who have (ahem) "issues." Private schools are under considerable pressure from those parents to keep out kids who are regarded as troublesome, different, what have you--they typically have little incentive to help or serve those kids.

Often kids who have unusual needs really will do better in a public school, where at least they have their civil rights to fall back on.

DeeDee

Wow! And you accused me of being making regressive, biased claims based on pseudoscience! Can you please show me some peer-reviewed studies demonstrating that private schools trample the civil rights of their students? And that so many of us private school parents are putting considerable pressure on our kids' schools to keep out kids who are "troublesome, different, [or] what have you?" Or are you just allowed to make unsupported claims because you believe them?

I've looked at a lot of schools for my kids over the years (30+), and the only one I encountered that expressly didn't want kids with disabilities was a "high-performing" public school. They were honest with me: "our test scores are high because we don't admit kids with disabilities. They can get services at the other schools in the district."

The only point I'm trying to make here is that your generalization doesn't hold water. I expect that the knife cuts both ways on this question.

Sheesh!

The legal protections I am referring to (the "free appropriate public education" guaranteed by IDEA) do not apply to private schools. These schools are not required to make the same accommodations for people with disabilities as public schools are. These schools have a choice, and many of them choose not to offer services and supports such as aides, PT, OT, speech, as well as many subtler forms of accommodation. This is not a matter of "trampling" on anything; it is a matter of what rules apply to those schools, and the choices their administrators make. This is not necessarily an instance of "meanness"; it's undoubtedly a decision about resources and clientele and a host of different variables. Running any school is complicated.


Sorry I offended you; obviously, I am not talking about all private school parents or all private schools everywhere.

However, in my extensive school-shopping in my region and in my wide-ranging correspondence with other people who face the same issues in educating their 2E/AS kids that I face with mine, this is noted as a frequently occurring situation. Prestigious private schools routinely decline to admit kids like mine, or they expel them when the going gets rough. (I can add that therapeutic private schools often don't know what to do with the 2E, either, leaving few options.)

DeeDee

If that's what you meant, that's what you should have said, instead of making sweeping generalizations. For example, you said "civil rights," not "IDEA legal protections that apply in the public schools." These are very different things.

One might ask for clarification before becoming inflammatory. Just a thought.

DeeDee

Respectfully, you did precisely what you accused me of doing (twice now), which I am merely exposing. Calling me a regressive pseudoscientific racist when I wasn't even bringing up race or thinking in those terms was way more inflammatory than anything I've written in this thread and was highly offensive. But it's okay when you don't like what other people say, right?

I see that this is a tactic that people use to distract people from the real point at hand. It's common in politics and elsewhere, and I'm sorry to see it here.

I have no problem with contentious statements when supported. I just don't like this tactic of accusing others of doing what you're doing.

Nobody called you, or anybody else, that, Val, either on this thread or on the other. Please don't put words into people's mouths (fingers) and then attack them; it isn't either fair or helpful.

It sure sounded that way in the quote I included above that was posted here. But we're derailing this thread now.

Food Fight!