Below is a letter submitted to the Eye from reader Jane Majewski. Majewski spoke emotionally during the public session at the last Board of Education meeting Tuesday. Earlier in the year Majewski started a petition calling for the termination of three Special Education Administrators because of what she felt was the mismanagement of her special needs son's education. The petition is here. The photo is of the courtyard at Keigwin School where Majewski stated her son wandered into the pond area pictured after she was reassured that the doors to the courtyard we locked at all times.
Majewski's letter is below. The posting of her letter is a courtesy, and does not necessarily represent the views of all the Eye contributors. The burden of proof lies with the author, Jane Majewski.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Words That I finally heard for the first time from BOE member Shelia Daniels . The sound of those words almost made me to breakdown in tears. It was echoed again moments later by Cheryl McClellan. Words that I have been waiting for since the beginning of becoming vocal about the issues we faced in this school district. Words that had I heard sooner, from anyone, I would not have called for the terminations of our BOE administrators.
The apology came after I presented the BOE with photos and a plea.
I have consistently voiced my concerns about the closing of the DEAL program- on two levels. One, that it was being closed and two that that transition of those kids into icm status was done without parental input.
Had I been asked, I would have offered my time, my expertise, my physical help and financial resources to help ensure a safe transition of our children into the district schools. For free, I would have told administrators that preschool size furniture for fifth graders would be ineffective. For free, I would have pointed out that a timeout room should not include a circuit breaker box. For free, I would have suggested field trips to transition the kids. I would have created a simple brochure describing the general needs of our kids for the district schools. For free, I would have donated and hung a coat rack at Keigwin.
When I recently asked Ms. Slade; "why weren't the parents included in the decision to close DEAL and/or the transition of them into the community?" her response was, " we wouldn't include parents in facility decisions; that is an administration role".
Since that is the case; then I feel the administrators need to accept the responsibility of the failed transition.
I would have simply liked to have heard, "I'm sorry".
I AM SORRY
Thats's all.
I am not asking for anything more than a safe environment for my son and his staff. Which brings me to why I write this story.
When I first saw the quad pond garden at Keigwin, I panicked. I know my child enough to know he would find away into that area. I was assured he would not because the doors are securely locked.
Imagine my surprise to receive a phone call and incident report that my son opened an unlocked door from the art room and entered this very area! He was reportedly running around this cement, unleveled cement area with statues and a filthy pond containing dead fish.
The staff hired to work with my son are trained and responsible to restrain him if needed. To be compelled to restrain a child acting out in this area is inconcieveable!
The quad has three walls of windows on multiple levels; open for the school population to view the pond. How inclusive is it to him to be viewed acting inappropriate by peers? How does it effect their perceptions of children with autism?
I contacted Ms Slade and Ms Senges. Ms. Senges quickly investigated. She reported that a janitor allegedly knew the lock was broken for some time but failed to report it to the administration.
Why would he? Keigwin never had a population of "ICM" kids. Shouldn't have he been briefed on what our kids need for safety?
My son is not allowed to go to art until the lock is fixed. Now he is being restricted from learning.
The administrators put a child into a building that continues to restrict his learning and jeopardizes his safety in a serious way. The safety of the staff are also jeopardized! Where is their union leadership? If their union and administration can't keep them safe- no wonder a para recently quit her job instead of mandate reporting.
Ann Perzan and Laurie Slade;
I have to ask you,
Would you want to be a para responsible to restrain a child in this garden?
Would you want your child running around and climbing in it?
Will it take a serious accident for either of you to accept responsibility for not preparing the community to transition DEAL kids into ICM status?
What will it take for one of you to turn to us, our staff, and our son-
And say,
"I'm sorry" ?
I need to clarify- he didn't fall into the pond- I was crying when speaking- he climbed out on the cement beam- to climb on the fountain- which is dangerously over the pond.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe the janitor should be blamed nor the staff- I'm concerned for their safety AND concerned that people are blamed who have not been trained.
Nor do I think the pond is a bad thing for the school-
I think my son should be at Lawrence in deal- since that isnt the case- then safer preparations made for his staff and him
Thank you Jane- made the correction!
ReplyDeleteJane - I can't agree more. The Special Ed. Administrators say it was a state decision to close DEAL. Did anyone ever see the document that said that? They said that DEAL wasn't effective anymore because they were placing out too many kids. I would like to compare the number of kids outplaced from then to now. I'm sure it's much higher now which costs the district more. They said that the academic rigor wasn't up to par. The teachers were certified, attended all the same workshops as general ed teachers, were on data teams, and were quality teachers. How is the academic rigor any better now when the ICM teachers have as many as 3-4 grade levels in one class. How can the teachers teach to all those grade levels? They said that the kids were going to their home schools. When the ICM class opened up at Farm Hill the majority of the kids were not from Farm Hill but from Moody. I dont think any of them were from Farm Hill. Now the population has changed in that class.
ReplyDeleteWhat do the initials "ICM" mean & what is the Deal Program? Please clarify. Thank-You
ReplyDeleteICM- I believe is "integrated classroom model"- where students with special needs are placed in regular classrooms, and spend the majority of their time there.
ReplyDeleteDEAL - Daily Experiences/Activities for Living Program program. Students in DEAL come from all of Middletown's elementary schools that have special needs these range(d) from emotional disturbances, intellectual disabilities and medical issues that prevented them from participating fully in a standard classroom. Goals of DEAL were to enable students to return to regular classrooms in their schools if possible, or remain in a segregated environment (classrooms housed Lawrence Elementary) that provided individualized special education. Students had contact with the at large population of students, but in a limited fashion.(please correct me if this is incorrect)
Numerous scholarly articles & case studies for and against both types of educational models.
The DEAL program was an amazing program that saved tax dollars money. The children referred to it would have been outsourced to specialized schools like high road, be haven- which are out of town, and totally a population of children with needs- very restrictive.
ReplyDeleteDEAL staff were trained to bring the children into the typical classrooms- if they reacted to sensory simulations- the staff quickly retrieved the child- brought him back to a section of Lawrence separate from the mainstream kids. It kept the kids safe-
Icm was defined to me as "intensive case management"
These were the "deal" kids when deal was closed- brought into the community schools.
The transition could have succeeded if things were dons differently, I believe.
However- I can't fathom why deal was closed; it saved money and was effective in keeping kids safe, engaged in learning, and integrating as they were able.
So, basically the Deal Program was there since Lawrence School opened in 1972. I was in the 4th grade at that time and Gene Nocera was my teacher back then. If I remember correctly the Special Education students had their own section at the school. They were housed right near the school's main office. I did not know it was called the Deal Program. What is that section of the school used for now that the Deal Program is not there? Is it still a Special Education wing? I could understand why it is not there because it segregated the special education students from the rest of the students. It is all about mainstreaming students into the community because special education students learn better with their non-disabled peers. Also, the non-disabled students begin to interact with the special education students and they think of them less as disabled but rather as people. It helps break down barriers.
ReplyDeleteDEAL was closed because of changes in legislation. Special education law requires that all sped students are to be educated in the least restricted environment. That means that they are to be mainstreamed to the fullest extent possible. DEAL is NOT coming back. If you don't like that, then you need to contact your legislators and make your case to them. The BOE and administration cannot help you with this. Their hands are tied by the law.
ReplyDeleteHow they transitioned the kids to icm status is not.
ReplyDeleteCircuit breaker boxes in time out rooms, furniture preschool sized, no coatracks in their class, broken locks on doors making access to a pond area have nothing to do with less restrictiveness . Including parents and teacher in that transition process is free.
I consistently say, if deal had to be closed- a safe and appropriate transition needed to occur.
I was at Lawrence school then bob- mr Audette was principle. I do not know when deal started.
ReplyDeleteTo say the ICM kids are more integrated- I would not agree- they are still in contained classrooms- funny- it reminded me of when I was at Lawrence school.
Deal was not like that- kids were very much integrated- brought back to their pod only when needed- and AlL the staff for all the classes helped each other-
Now it's like those classes are in buildings without a way for all the staff to work together- a few went to bielefield- a fre to farmhill- a few to Keigwin- and you get the idea. They're still contained classrooms.
The difference also was enza macri- included our children- knew them- the staff from
Her- to the nurse- to the cafe aid included our kids - and understood them.
What was described at farmhill does not sound like the community was trained for the kids.
My experience at Keigwin is similar- but the building is not safe.
To anonymous- I asked to
Read the state requirement to close deal- the letter cited at BOE meeting seems outdated and was missing a closure letter.
On the Lawrence website there was a study down that stated DEAL was an amazing way to integrate children with disabilities-
I really am just looking for validation- instead of everyone blame shifting- I shouldn't say "just" I would also like my son and his staff to be safe.
Least restrictive is defined differently for each child- IEP stands for individualized education plan.
I have asked many times for the state level people contact info- and no one can give it to me. I would advocate on a state level.