NationStates Jolt Archive

Here's the deal: (besides the fact I don't have a link)

I'm in junior high school. I have a brother with Asperger's Syndrome (and I don't). And every day at school, I actually go to learn - or at least learn the basic things so I can go to a nice engineering college (hopefully MIT) and unveil my smarts upon the world for the better. And I'm not the only person - there are thousands of people like that across the US, I am sure, who want to learn from the public education system and then go off to change the world for the better.

So, of course, I'm listening to my history teacher talk, trying to learn and then contribute to this world along the line, when the kid next to me starts making really weird noises. He's Autistic, too.

So, what happens next? Oh, his teaching assistant tells him to "shoosh". And, of course, he doesn't stop. And then the next day we have a test, and she takes the kids who are struggling, but have nothing wrong with them, and the Autistic kid out of the room to take the test - and they get special help.

So here's me, all A's, sitting there, my test finished fifteen minutes ahead of schedule (what a nerd!), and what do I do?

Think about what is wrong with the paragraph two above this one.

And of course, I come to a sudden realization: this Autistic kid will not contribute to society. And those struggling kids will just go become factory workers or something. But I want to to become an engineer and just simply help society.

And then I realize that a couple of years ago, my school district destroyed their gifted education budget (aimed at people like me). No gifted teachers at all. Yet, at my school we have at least five special education teachers for every 150 students (there's a thousand), plus three co-ordinators.

So then I wonder: would the money that goes to this ridiculous bureaucracy, as well as the ridiculous athletic budget (we bought fifteen new sets of football pads in a BAD economy), be better put, or at least a small percentage of it, to kids who will then promptly try to harm each other, Autistic children who may never do a job for society, or gifted kids who want to go out and become our next brilliant politicians, engineers, farmers, and scientists?

My opinion is pretty clear: give at least a little cut to the kids who can give back. Yes, keep some special education teachers - but a full bureaucracy? Why? Are we trying to waste money? That is - my money, your money, our money - the taxpayer's money - toward draining resources, or producing the next generation that will solve the oil crisis, the climate change crisis (if you believe in that), find a cure for AIDS and cancer, and solve the Middle East?

What do you think?

I don't really know where to start with this.

Sorry, if you take from the Sped budget, youll get protest faster than you can say the word Bureaucracy...

probably be better luck getting the the athletic budget dropped a bit, but even then, there's a huge push for it, especially with the obesity problem, so youll still probably get protests...

fact is, the only politically correct place to slash money is the 'gifted' budget...

personally, I dont see why the school system shouldnt have enough money for the whole bit, honestly...

Did you...just...say that your brother and his 'type', being inherently unable to 'contribute to society', should not be helped so that wonderful geniuses like yourself could access those resources instead?

What, like fucking welfare for smart kids?

Ugh, people like you, going through life saying 'oh look at me I'm gifted, I'm special, I should be running the joint'...

Special is some Indian kid in some village somewhere using a beat up textbook to become a world-renowned mathematician. Not kids who think they're smarter than they are. (I direct you to the poorly worded and terribly unclear OP)

I think you need a lot more help being as smart as you can be when you aren't trying to be as smart as you can be. Enrichment programs have a wonderful place in that they act as a net to catch the intelligent underachievers who slip through the cracks by exposing them to subjects and interests they never knew about. But Enrichment programs are no different than any other special education program in the sense that they try to help people get over their disadvantages.

Children with an insatiable thirst to learn, a motivation to do so and responsible parents to provide direction have no need for special education. Are you such a child?

I understand your position, but it's my personal belief that everyone have the right to basic primary and secondary education. I do sympathize with your feelings; sometimes I do resent some of the students who I feel hold me back, be it due to mental disorder (which, I admit, hasn't really happened yet... unless I count a slightly mentally retarded student whom I am tutoring who has grades in 80-90s) or plain ignorance. But unfortunetly, we will have to bear with it because we live in a society that takes measures to care for its citizens, regardless of how "useful" they are.

EDIT: Take it easy guys. This guy's only in junior high (not that I'm in a position to look better, being only just a few years ahead).

I guess start by taking look at what we've labeled children with autism and other conditions. We refer to them as special needs. Why? Because they have special needs, needs that they may have trouble coping with on their own without the support they currently receive, or as this case is where I live, the support they need and aren't getting.

Would you rather have them be complete non-functioning members of society? Because that's exactly what many of them would be without the social support we provide for them. Your right in that nearly all of them won't be the doctors and scientists of tomorrow. They still may be functioning or semi-functioning members of society though, however menial their role may seem to you, with the support we provide or should be providing.

Did you...just...say that your brother and his 'type', being inherently unable to 'contribute to society', should not be helped so that wonderful geniuses like yourself could access those resources instead?

What, like fucking welfare for smart kids?

Ugh, people like you, going through life saying 'oh look at me I'm gifted, I'm special, I should be running the joint'...

Special is some Indian kid in some village somewhere using a beat up textbook to become a world-renowned mathematician. Not kids who think they're smarter than they are. (I direct you to the poorly worded and terribly unclear OP)

I know that I'm not the smartest kid on the block. And I know that they CAN contribute to society. I just can't see it happening. And I like to think that I'm not so stuck-up. And yes, sorry about the OP. Had it coming.

I understand your position, but it's my personal belief that everyone have the right to basic primary and secondary education. I do sympathize with your feelings; sometimes I do resent some of the students who I feel hold me back, be it due to mental disorder (which, I admit, hasn't really happened yet... unless I count a slightly mentally retarded student whom I am tutoring who has grades in 80-90s) or plain ignorance. But unfortunetly, we will have to bear with it because we live in a society that takes measures to care for its citizens, regardless of how "useful" they are.

How true.

I think you need a lot more help being as smart as you can be when you aren't trying to be as smart as you can be. Enrichment programs have a wonderful place in that they act as a net to catch the intelligent underachievers who slip through the cracks by exposing them to subjects and interests they never knew about. But Enrichment programs are no different than any other special education program in the sense that they try to help people get over their disadvantages.

Children with an insatiable thirst to learn, a motivation to do so and responsible parents to provide direction have no need for special education. Are you such a child?

You sound a ton like my mom. But I think I have to disagree with you about Enrichment programs, at least from my point of view. It seems to me that it's to deepen your knowledge and advance you ahead, not fill in the cracks.

And am I such a child? I will be honest - no. Parents, check, motivation, check, thirst... I feel so. I just want to be the best that I can be, and I feel that I am not getting it from the system.

Sorry, if you take from the Sped budget, youll get protest faster than you can say the word Bureaucracy...

probably be better luck getting the the athletic budget dropped a bit, but even then, there's a huge push for it, especially with the obesity problem, so youll still probably get protests...

fact is, the only politically correct place to slash money is the 'gifted' budget...

personally, I dont see why the school system shouldnt have enough money for the whole bit, honestly...

That's what I think. To be honest, I'm hoping Obama does something about this since education is a priority, but it will probably be an expansion of NCLB, which in some ways just did not work whatsoever.

That's what I think. To be honest, I'm hoping Obama does something about this since education is a priority, but it will probably be an expansion of NCLB, which in some ways just did not work whatsoever.

Well, Im not saying they should slash the aforementioned budgets, for the again, aforementioned reasons, they are required...

but that is why they slashed gifted and not the others, because they can get away with it...

personally I dont think they should be able to get away with slashing an education budget at all...

I guess start by taking look at what we've labeled children with autism and other conditions. We refer to them as special needs. Why? Because they have special needs, needs that they may have trouble coping with on their own without the support they currently receive, or as this case is where I live, the support they need and aren't getting.

Would you rather have them be complete non-functioning members of society? Because that's exactly what many of them would be without the social support we provide for them. Your right in that nearly all of them won't be the doctors and scientists of tomorrow. They still may be functioning or semi-functioning members of society though, however menial their role may seem to you, with the support we provide or should be providing.

I would, in fact, rather have them be functioning. But I just can't see that happening. That's my point. But we have to help. But are we overdoing it in those rich, suburban districts?

Despite the general rant-ish nature of the OP, I do see his point, and immensely sympathise. Maybe because when I was in grade 8, I was attacked by a "special ed" student. I was pushed onto iced pavement. The kid didn't even get told that his actions were wrong. I wound up in the VP's office. I was innocent. I was in tears and my head hurt like a bitch. Next thing I knew, I was told I had to go help out in the special ed class so I could see that they needed help more than discipline. I was given detention and wasted several English classes there. Just because I doing an independent project as opposed to the assigned novel. To this day, I still resent all the money spent on these types of students, and the lack of money in comparison spent on the general student population; on the average student who may or may not be the next greatest inventory but will have a lot to offer at the end of the day.

Well, Im not saying they should slash the aforementioned budgets, for the again, aforementioned reasons, they are required...

but that is why they slashed gifted and not the others, because they can get away with it...

personally I dont think they should be able to get away with slashing an education budget at all...

Yah. Education is the way of the future. But, just, sometimes you have to get away with cutting it - like when the economy is bad (as states and municipals are doing, I'm sure). But no, it should not be cut, especially for something like fifty more F/A-22 Raptors, which are not very adequate for the type of fighting they will be doing - guerilla.

Despite the general rant-ish nature of the OP, I do see his point, and immensely sympathise. Maybe because when I was in grade 8, I was attacked by a "special ed" student. I was pushed onto iced pavement. The kid didn't even get told that his actions were wrong. I wound up in the VP's office. I was innocent. I was in tears and my head hurt like a bitch. Next thing I knew, I was told I had to go help out in the special ed class so I could see that they needed help more than discipline. To this day, I still resent all the money spent on these types of students, and the lack of money in comparison spent on the general student population; on the average student who may or may not be the next greatest inventory but will have a lot to offer at the end of the day.

I would say thats a separate issue though, and speaks more to treatment rather than whether they should receive money...

I would say they should be punished, rewarded, etc. just like the other kids, and that part of the problem is the separation and 'special' treatment they get, I can understand having to be in a separate class, but, when it comes to prettymuch everything else, it should be treated on an equal basis...

You sound a ton like my mom. But I think I have to disagree with you about Enrichment programs, at least from my point of view. It seems to me that it's to deepen your knowledge and advance you ahead, not fill in the cracks.

And am I such a child? I will be honest - no. Parents, check, motivation, check, thirst... I feel so. I just want to be the best that I can be, and I feel that I am not getting it from the system.

Then get it from outside the system. Try designing and building a trebuchet in your backyard. You'll learn tons about mechanical design, mathematics and physics and when it's built, you'll be able to fling pies over 200 yards. Do I sound like your mom now? ;)

Despite the general rant-ish nature of the OP, I do see his point, and immensely sympathise. Maybe because when I was in grade 8, I was attacked by a "special ed" student. I was pushed onto iced pavement. The kid didn't even get told that his actions were wrong. I wound up in the VP's office. I was innocent. I was in tears and my head hurt like a bitch. Next thing I knew, I was told I had to go help out in the special ed class so I could see that they needed help more than discipline. To this day, I still resent all the money spent on these types of students, and the lack of money in comparison spent on the general student population; on the average student who may or may not be the next greatest inventory but will have a lot to offer at the end of the day.

Wow. This is essentially what I mean. Is it really worth it shifting 75% of the money left after teachers and athletics to that end of the spectrum? Obviously, you've got to do something for them - but are there other purposes that deserve some money too?

Then get it from outside the system. Try designing and building a trebuchet in your backyard. You'll learn tons about mechanical design, mathematics and physics and when it's build, you'll be able to fling pies over 200 yards. Do I sound like your mom now? ;)

Nope! Actually, my brother tried to do that with my dad... and didn't really do it that well. Time to hit the Google.

I would, in fact, rather have them be functioning. But I just can't see that happening. That's my point. But we have to help. But are we overdoing it in those rich, suburban districts?

Well your OP indicated you'd rather the budgets for programs such athletics or special needs be given second tier to the gifted student program. Unfortunately the world we live in does not consider education or any of its subsidiary programs a priority at all. As Skallvia said...

personally I dont think they should be able to get away with slashing an education budget at all...

Coming from someone who has had these thoughts before, and considers himself relatively intelligent...

These kids need the extra help, and there's no guarantee that they won't become productive members of society. In fact, who are you to decide who is, or is not a productive member of society? These kids need the help, others, do not. Just because you're gifted, or consider yourself such, does not entitle you to special treatment. Having an advantage demands you take hold of it, and use it to the best of your abilities if you wish to get ahead. Don't worry. In High School, you can take honors classes if you really feel like 'contributing'.

I would say thats a separate issue though, and speaks more to treatment rather than whether they should receive money...

I would say they should be punished, rewarded, etc. just like the other kids, and that part of the problem is the separation and 'special' treatment they get, I can understand having to be in a separate class, but, when it comes to prettymuch everything else, it should be treated on an equal basis...

My school didn't think so. They punished the innocent. I know that kid never so much as got a finger wag. And that, is inequitable and wrong.

Looking at the OP, I can see that the Autistic student who disturbed the class got lax punishment, whereas if it had been another; an average student, they would have been punished. Another case of inequities in public schools.

Wow. This is essentially what I mean. Is it really worth it shifting 75% of the money left after teachers and athletics to that end of the spectrum? Obviously, you've got to do something for them - but are there other purposes that deserve some money too?

Perhaps I should mention that it happened about 12 years ago. Even then, not much as changed. Funding levels always fluctuate, but some things just don't change.

Here's a thought: If you want more money for the education budget (so cuts don't have to be made), raise taxes.

Well your OP indicated you'd rather the budgets for programs such athletics or special needs be given second tier to the gifted student program. Unfortunately the world we live in does not consider education or any of its subsidiary programs a priority at all. As Skallvia said...

I did come on a little strong... or I'm excersing my inner politician...

Coming from someone who has had these thoughts before, and considers himself relatively intelligent...

These kids need the extra help, and there's no guarantee that they won't become productive members of society. In fact, who are you to decide who is, or is not a productive member of society? These kids need the help, others, do not. Just because you're gifted, or consider yourself such, does not entitle you to special treatment. Having an advantage demands you take hold of it, and use it to the best of your abilities if you wish to get ahead. Don't worry. In High School, you can take honors classes if you really feel like 'contributing'.

Next year, I plan to take all honors courses, as well as two math courses for exactly that reason.

But yes, you're right - who am I to decide that? I would just like a little more equality.

My school didn't think so. They punished the innocent. I know that kid never so much as got a finger wag. And that, is inequitable and wrong.

Looking at the OP, I can see that the Autistic student who disturbed the class got lax punishment, whereas if it had been another; an average student, they would have been punished. Another case of inequities in public schools.

Perhaps I should mention that it happened about 12 years ago. Even then, not much as changed. Funding levels always fluctuate, but some things just don't change.

I see this practically every day. Then, when I finish my assignments, I sit down to read my book and I get yelled at. It's just ridiculous.

Inclusion is an emotionally provocative topic. The implimentation varies in different parts of the country, some places more effectively than others. In New Mexico, for example, "gifted" is included with special education, and so the two budgets are combined. Many people say that most of the problems with inclusion are the result of No Child Left Behind. I couldn't say. But one method for effectively differentiating learning is to use peer tutoring. Really want to give back to society? Start by helping your autistic neighbor do a little better in school, maybe by just being open to being their friend. Try getting into their world, and relating on their level. It takes curiosity and imagination, but I'm sure you've got those. What it also takes, and what you may get out of it, besides a friend you never expected, is compassion. Good luck!

Not only should we not educate them, we should stop them from breeding, too.

I don't really know where to start with this.

How about "I'm in junior high"? You might not even need to tackle the rest of it.

Despite the general rant-ish nature of the OP, I do see his point, and immensely sympathise. Maybe because when I was in grade 8, I was attacked by a "special ed" student. I was pushed onto iced pavement. The kid didn't even get told that his actions were wrong. I wound up in the VP's office. I was innocent. I was in tears and my head hurt like a bitch. Next thing I knew, I was told I had to go help out in the special ed class so I could see that they needed help more than discipline. I was given detention and wasted several English classes there. Just because I doing an independent project as opposed to the assigned novel. To this day, I still resent all the money spent on these types of students, and the lack of money in comparison spent on the general student population; on the average student who may or may not be the next greatest inventory but will have a lot to offer at the end of the day.

Once a black kid at school called me a bitch. I don't know why the government has to waste money on those people.

There is just so much wrong with the OP I don't even know where to begin...

Here, some background reading for you.
http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=15

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Act

Once a black kid at school called me a bitch. I don't know why the government has to waste money on those people.

I had a girl call me an asshole and threaten to sick her dad on me...

I dont think we should waste money on them either, lol...

Lets get back to 1850, dammit....

My school didn't think so. They punished the innocent. I know that kid never so much as got a finger wag. And that, is inequitable and wrong.

Looking at the OP, I can see that the Autistic student who disturbed the class got lax punishment, whereas if it had been another; an average student, they would have been punished. Another case of inequities in public schools.

I'm sorry, I'm really not looking for a citation, but are you fucking kidding me? Did you get mad when the kids in wheelchairs didn't have to run track, too?

How much productively would we lose if parents had to stay home and take care of special kids like your brother rather then working? Like you said there are thousands of kids like you. Getting into MIT takes over coming your weaknesses now. If you can't compete with those thousands of Kids who are able to overcome the exact same weaknesses, forget about MIT and plan on community college.

And just so you know I know where your coming from. A rather large special ed kid grabbed a girls hair and slammed her into a wall my Freshmen year. When I intervened and showed him what it felt like I got suspended.

And just so you know I know where your coming from. A rather large special ed kid grabbed a girls hair and slammed her into a wall my Freshmen year. When I intervened and showed him what it felt like I got suspended.
Tell ya the truth, you were lucky, they arrest you for that these days...

I suspect for all the leniency they receive, they'd give it all up to be considered normal.

I think grouping kids by age is the largest issue, especially between 6-10, when variance even among similar ages is enormous.

The problem with schools is that you've basically gathered together a large amount of energy balls and you need to control them for 8 hours of the day, little more than large daycare centres really, it means you have to juggle between allowing children to learn at their own pace and forcing in 40 people to a classroom, all with wild variations in learning ability.

So every kid, almost, will feel aggrieved that they aren't receiving the right attention because when you're having to average, no one fits perfectly and so the choice is to place most money and attention on those furthest from the average.

Why on earth would funding gifted programs and funding special ed programs be mutually exclusive? They're both important, and it makes far more sense to me to argue that the education budget in general be increased than to quibble about which important things to cut.

Why on earth would funding gifted programs and funding special ed programs be mutually exclusive? They're both important, and it makes far more sense to me to argue that the education budget in general be increased than to quibble about which important things to cut.

Thats just crazy talk, when the Tea Party says cut spending, you cut spending....

increasing budgets, honestly, :p

My school didn't think so. They punished the innocent. I know that kid never so much as got a finger wag. And that, is inequitable and wrong.

Looking at the OP, I can see that the Autistic student who disturbed the class got lax punishment, whereas if it had been another; an average student, they would have been punished. Another case of inequities in public schools.

Two people commit the same crime of assault.

One of them is mentally handicapped, and honestly didn't understand that what they were doing would have the consequences it did.

The other person did it with full knowledge of outcome, and intent to cause that outcome.

Should both be punished equally? (don't even bring up mens rea, I'm just saying :p)

One of the biggest problems with 'mainstreaming' (putting special needs children, and yes that includes those on the 'gifted' side of spectrum) in with the 'normals', is that there isn't enough actual understanding of differences. This idea that treating different people differently is an inequality in all cases, completely fails to take into account the fact that we do this all the time, and with very good reasons.

I'm not saying you deserved any punishment at all. But I have worked with special needs kids, and yes, they do need a lot more attention and help, but they also face obstacles that you or I never had to. Not a one of them chose those disabilities.

The issue of funding drives me nuts though, because the education budget being slashed is a very old meme. The problem is, as Poli pointed out, sitting here bitching about how we should proportion the rapidly shrinking pie is missing the point. Funding overall needs to be increased. Of all the essential services we as a society value, education seems the most obviously important on its face. Yet when we descend into these debates, that fact gets lost. All of a sudden it's the Arts versus Physical Education versus Academics versus Special Needs. Divide and conquer, baby.

Then get it from outside the system. Try designing and building a trebuchet in your backyard. You'll learn tons about mechanical design, mathematics and physics and when it's built, you'll be able to fling pies over 200 yards. Do I sound like your mom now? ;)
You sound like MY mom.

...


MOM!!! :eek:

Yet, at my school we have at least five special education teachers for every 150 students (there's a thousand), plus three co-ordinators.

(snip)

What do you think?
I do think that sounds like an unusually high number. That would be what - thirty five special ed teachers and three coordinators?

Less well funded junior high schools with a thousand students only have about that many teachers. At an average junior high, that might well be ... what, close to half the teaching staff? It seems remarkably high. Google-fu tells me that the number of kids diagnosed as "special needs" has increased sharply since I was in high school, but that still sounds high.

Now, to the point. Gifted students do take special attention - and IMO, it's a shame that many of our schools fail many of our more talented students, who do slip through the cracks at an alarming rate - but the nice thing about gifted students is that many of them eventually land on their feet regardless of how terribly the school system fails them. Children with learning disabilities don't have as good a chance on their own.

We do lose a lot when gifted students who aren't motivated to succeed (as you are) aren't pushed into taking advantage of their abilities, and simply coast through the school system bored and apathetic. We need to pay careful attention on both ends of the curve.
How much productively would we lose if parents had to stay home and take care of special kids like your brother rather then working?
What do we lose when parents pull their children out of the school system and homeschool them because the schools are failing them?

I was in that situation. My parents homeschooled me for three years (and my brother for two) because the school system was doing a terrible job. Had I not had parents who were able to take the time and effort of homeschooling me... I remember with perfect clarity the two other boys in my grade at elementary school who could best hold up a conversation with me. Both had a great deal of potential; one was extraordinarily creative with a great memory for details and rules; the other was smart as a whip, as they say.

When I returned to the public school system for high school, the school system had already failed both of them. One was a drug dealer; the other was rapidly falling behind, ostracized, bullied, and with a rapidly developing complex of self-esteem issues and academic difficulties. He took five years to graduate, and the last I heard, was still struggling to get on track with his education.

I don't know what happened to the drug dealer after high school. Actually, I'm not sure what happened to him during high school, seeing as he was largely out of sight by then, but I'm pretty sure the police were involved.

And I wonder: Where would I be today if my parents hadn't pulled me out of school? I might be getting out of jail this spring instead of getting into a doctoral program.

Tell ya the truth, you were lucky, they arrest you for that these days...

I didn't touch him after he no longer had contact with the girl. Besides I was only 14 and it was a girl I was trying to talk to at the time. And to be honest the suspension seemed like a reward.

I have a hard time understanding the OP's problem. Is he complaining that kids with more needs get more attention than kids who can reasonably be expected to manage themselves? Is he complaining about a specific thing in the school system interfering his ability to progress at his natural pace in his education?

I can't really sympathize with either idea. Both trigger my "when I was a kid, we had to walk 10 miles a day to and from school, uphill, both ways, in the snow, barefoot, even when it wasn't snowing -- you ungrateful little so-and-so" reflex.

When I was a kid, the public school system sucked so horrendously, that it was hard to tell the difference between the "gifted" programs and the "special" programs.

I went to a "gifted program" "magnet school" highschool to study pro-level advertising design starting at age 15. When I applied/tested to get accepted to that school, it was was one of the leading college-level non-colleges in the northeast US, had all-city champion teams in fencing and wrestling, and was considered such good professional training that the big ad agencies and design houses used to send recruiters to its graduation ceremonies, to offer the kids jobs, fresh out of high school. By the time I started attendance, a year later, NYC had gone bankrupt, budgets for all programs had been destroyed (not just cut), and I found myself stuck in an art school with half its advertised arts curriculum -- none of the equipment-heavy disciplines were running, and there was no art history course -- half its former academic curriculum, no sports or music programs at all, and we had to buy all our own supplies (which was not cheap). They didn't have even enough money to get in an exterminator to kill the fucking cockroaches. Hey, but at least there were no shootings. That couldn't be said for other schools.

Sad, really, because before that I had had very good luck with schools. My elementary school (good old P.S. 90 *sniff*) to this day is one of the top 10 in NYC, and in my day, it was so good, that I had already covered all the junior high and highschool materials, as well as some first year college level stuff, by grade 6. Which was a mixed blessing, as my school experience was pretty much all downhill from there. I did notice that the authorities in both junior high and highschool described me as "largely self-educated."

Funny coincidence: You couldn't tell the difference between the "gifted" and "special" programs at P.S. 90, either.

So, basically, I'd say that if a school is either very good or very bad, then the allowances made for special needs kids are not going to make a difference. If they do make a difference, that means the school is average, and is struggling to cope, just like people do.

Both trigger my "when I was a kid, we had to walk 10 miles a day to and from school, uphill, both ways, in the snow, barefoot, even when it wasn't snowing -- you ungrateful little so-and-so" reflex.



They dont even use Rubber Dodgeballs anymore, pansy foam ones, or not at all...

10 years later, we have emo kids...

"You take that shot in the balls and you Like IT!" :p

Here's the deal: (besides the fact I don't have a link)

I'm in junior high school. I have a brother with Asperger's Syndrome (and I don't). And every day at school, I actually go to learn - or at least learn the basic things so I can go to a nice engineering college (hopefully MIT) and unveil my smarts upon the world for the better. And I'm not the only person - there are thousands of people like that across the US, I am sure, who want to learn from the public education system and then go off to change the world for the better.

So, of course, I'm listening to my history teacher talk, trying to learn and then contribute to this world along the line, when the kid next to me starts making really weird noises. He's Autistic, too.

So, what happens next? Oh, his teaching assistant tells him to "shoosh". And, of course, he doesn't stop. And then the next day we have a test, and she takes the kids who are struggling, but have nothing wrong with them, and the Autistic kid out of the room to take the test - and they get special help.

So here's me, all A's, sitting there, my test finished fifteen minutes ahead of schedule (what a nerd!), and what do I do?

Think about what is wrong with the paragraph two above this one.

And of course, I come to a sudden realization: this Autistic kid will not contribute to society. And those struggling kids will just go become factory workers or something. But I want to to become an engineer and just simply help society.

And then I realize that a couple of years ago, my school district destroyed their gifted education budget (aimed at people like me). No gifted teachers at all. Yet, at my school we have at least five special education teachers for every 150 students (there's a thousand), plus three co-ordinators.

So then I wonder: would the money that goes to this ridiculous bureaucracy, as well as the ridiculous athletic budget (we bought fifteen new sets of football pads in a BAD economy), be better put, or at least a small percentage of it, to kids who will then promptly try to harm each other, Autistic children who may never do a job for society, or gifted kids who want to go out and become our next brilliant politicians, engineers, farmers, and scientists?

My opinion is pretty clear: give at least a little cut to the kids who can give back. Yes, keep some special education teachers - but a full bureaucracy? Why? Are we trying to waste money? That is - my money, your money, our money - the taxpayer's money - toward draining resources, or producing the next generation that will solve the oil crisis, the climate change crisis (if you believe in that), find a cure for AIDS and cancer, and solve the Middle East?

What do you think?
I think that you with your all As have proven you can succeed without needing extra help.

Here's the deal: (besides the fact I don't have a link)

I'm in junior high school. I have a brother with Asperger's Syndrome (and I don't). And every day at school, I actually go to learn - or at least learn the basic things so I can go to a nice engineering college (hopefully MIT) and unveil my smarts upon the world for the better. And I'm not the only person - there are thousands of people like that across the US, I am sure, who want to learn from the public education system and then go off to change the world for the better.Backstory. Got it.

So, of course, I'm listening to my history teacher talk, trying to learn and then contribute to this world along the line, when the kid next to me starts making really weird noises. He's Autistic, too.
Irrelevant to the situation. Autism is a spectrum disorder with Asperger's being among the most mild. This other student (who likely has moderate to severe autism) might also be trying to learn and contribute to the world

So, what happens next? Oh, his teaching assistant tells him to "shoosh". And, of course, he doesn't stop. issue with the para, not the system or teacher.
And then the next day we have a test, and she takes the kids who are struggling, but have nothing wrong with them, and the Autistic kid out of the room to take the test - and they get special help.You know these kids have nothing wrong with them how? You know all their medical files? You've seen their IEP's and 504's? You're a doctor capable of diagnosing others? No? Didn't think so.

So here's me, all A's, sitting there, my test finished fifteen minutes ahead of schedule (what a nerd!), and what do I do?Something else productive and quiet? What does this matter?

Think about what is wrong with the paragraph two above this one.
From what you've written? Absolutly nothing.
And of course, I come to a sudden realization: this Autistic kid will not contribute to society.
Prove it. Demonstrate that an autistic child will never contribute to society.Given increased mathmatical abilities amongst autistic people, I'd say they can actually do quite a bit. Actually, there are quite a few autistic kids at MIT. If you have an issue now, I'd say get ready.
And those struggling kids will just go become factory workers or something. But I want to to become an engineer and just simply help society
Yes...because a child needs help, he will clearly never do anything except work in a factory. Or maybe, he'll take the help he needs, and do quite a bit.
And then I realize that a couple of years ago, my school district destroyed their gifted education budget (aimed at people like me). No gifted teachers at all. Yet, at my school we have at least five special education teachers for every 150 students (there's a thousand), plus three co-ordinators.Hate to break it to you, but Gifted and Talented budgeting falls under special education.

So then I wonder: would the money that goes to this ridiculous bureaucracy, as well as the ridiculous athletic budget (we bought fifteen new sets of football pads in a BAD economy), athletics are an entirely seperate issue
be better put, or at least a small percentage of it, to kids who will then promptly try to harm each other,not nearly enough background on what you're talking about with that.
Autistic children who may never do a job for society,prove it
or gifted kids who want to go out and become our next brilliant politicians, engineers, farmers, and scientists?Why not autistic kids who want to become engineers? Scientists? Farmers? Etc.

My opinion is pretty clear: give at least a little cut to the kids who can give back. Yes, keep some special education teachers - but a full bureaucracy? Why? Are we trying to waste money? Figure out how funding works first.
That is - my money, your money, our money - the taxpayer's money - You are in Jr. high. This means that you are in 7th or 8th grade...meaning you are under the age of 16 and therefore very likely don't pay taxes. It isn't your money.
toward draining resources, or producing the next generation that will solve the oil crisis, the climate change crisis (if you believe in that), find a cure for AIDS and cancer, and solve the Middle East?
false dichotomy.

Nicely done, Sarkhaan.

Here's the deal: (besides the fact I don't have a link)

I'm in junior high school. I have a brother with Asperger's Syndrome (and I don't). And every day at school, I actually go to learn - or at least learn the basic things so I can go to a nice engineering college (hopefully MIT) and unveil my smarts upon the world for the better. And I'm not the only person - there are thousands of people like that across the US, I am sure, who want to learn from the public education system and then go off to change the world for the better.

So, of course, I'm listening to my history teacher talk, trying to learn and then contribute to this world along the line, when the kid next to me starts making really weird noises. He's Autistic, too.

So, what happens next? Oh, his teaching assistant tells him to "shoosh". And, of course, he doesn't stop. And then the next day we have a test, and she takes the kids who are struggling, but have nothing wrong with them, and the Autistic kid out of the room to take the test - and they get special help.

So here's me, all A's, sitting there, my test finished fifteen minutes ahead of schedule (what a nerd!), and what do I do?

Think about what is wrong with the paragraph two above this one.

And of course, I come to a sudden realization: this Autistic kid will not contribute to society. And those struggling kids will just go become factory workers or something. But I want to to become an engineer and just simply help society.

And then I realize that a couple of years ago, my school district destroyed their gifted education budget (aimed at people like me). No gifted teachers at all. Yet, at my school we have at least five special education teachers for every 150 students (there's a thousand), plus three co-ordinators.

So then I wonder: would the money that goes to this ridiculous bureaucracy, as well as the ridiculous athletic budget (we bought fifteen new sets of football pads in a BAD economy), be better put, or at least a small percentage of it, to kids who will then promptly try to harm each other, Autistic children who may never do a job for society, or gifted kids who want to go out and become our next brilliant politicians, engineers, farmers, and scientists?

My opinion is pretty clear: give at least a little cut to the kids who can give back. Yes, keep some special education teachers - but a full bureaucracy? Why? Are we trying to waste money? That is - my money, your money, our money - the taxpayer's money - toward draining resources, or producing the next generation that will solve the oil crisis, the climate change crisis (if you believe in that), find a cure for AIDS and cancer, and solve the Middle East?

What do you think?

I'm autistic, not only do I manage to function normally I NEVER went to special education AND I graduated college with a BA and an ASB in only 2 years with a 3.8 GPA, I was a captain on my high school academic team, a member of the student council my junior and senior years, one of the students responsible for decorating the school for exhibition nights, and I continue to be active in my community; I plan on going back to college to get a degree in education and maybe teach technology. All this with no medications, no special education, and no government assistance.

Your assumptions are to put it frankly, insulting.

Nicely done, Sarkhaan.

Sarky had a long night at work and is bitter that he doesn't have a real teaching job ;)

Sarky had a long night at work and is bitter that he doesn't have a real teaching job ;)

Sarky should move to Montreal. Where he probably won't get a real teaching job, but he can at least come for a drink with me down in the Village.

Sarky had a long night at work and is bitter that he doesn't have a real teaching job ;)
I think I have a few extra JHS kids wandering around right now. You want me to ship them to you? ;):tongue:

Edit: And I keep telling you. If you want a position, think Vegas baby! Even with the economy imploding Clark County still goes any anyone with teaching credientals and a pulse with nets.

Edit: And I keep telling you. If you want a position, think Vegas baby! Even with the economy imploding Clark County still goes any anyone with teaching credientals and a pulse with nets.
Really!? I could spend some time teaching while I get certified to practice law....

I could fuck my favourite couple all the time...

It's warm there, the roads are fun to drive really fast on...

No lebanese food though, major downer...

But really close to southern locales...

Montreal...Vegas...Montreal...damn. Yeah, Montreal still wins this one.


But Sarkhaan, I bet Sumamba would love to have you as a roomie!

Sarky should move to Montreal. Where he probably won't get a real teaching job, but he can at least come for a drink with me down in the Village.
Sarky would be shreded in that city (I have the Bruins tattoo, and this is the city that boo's the US national anthem every game for the last 7 years or so)

Though, a drink would be lovely. At least, one that I'm not serving.

I think I have a few extra JHS kids wandering around right now. You want me to ship them to you? ;):tongue:
...sorry, I'm only certified for 8th grade and up ;)

Edit: And I keep telling you. If you want a position, think Vegas baby! Even with the economy imploding Clark County still goes any anyone with teaching credientals and a pulse with nets.I've been told Atlanta as well...but what can I say? I'm an angry, bitter, sarcastic, elite New Englander to the core.

But Sarkhaan, I bet Sumamba would love to have you as a roomie!

He may get one yet....haha

...sorry, I'm only certified for 8th grade and up ;)

Not that I believe you're sorry, but really? We specialise here, elementary or secondary, but we are certified to teach either.

Not that I believe you're sorry, but really? We specialise here, elementary or secondary, but we are certified to teach either.

Mass has the same divison, but certification requirements are (extremely mildly) different. Secondary teachers (8-12) are required to student teach and take two tests (subject matter and communications and literacy). Elementary (k-8) have to take three (subject matter, communications and literacy, and general ed knowledge).

Back in the days when I had to go to this "school" thing you refer to I had some involvement in the special needs programme (along with various gifted programmes run in the school) along with being in normal classes so in a way I've seen both sides of the whole special needs/gifted 'battle' that's happening here.

A lot of the people who need special ed help are actually pretty intelligent (I've had some quite intelligent conversations with people who can't read) and just need help in one or two areas, others have personality disorders and need to be treated differently.

I'm of the opinion that the current educational system is pretty much f***ed up as it doesn't do all that well for those who are normal, let alone special needs or gifted but OTOH I don't really have any ideas on how to fix it (and I went to some of the better schools).

Sorry, if you take from the Sped budget, youll get protest faster than you can say the word Bureaucracy...

probably be better luck getting the the athletic budget dropped a bit, but even then, there's a huge push for it, especially with the obesity problem, so youll still probably get protests...

fact is, the only politically correct place to slash money is the 'gifted' budget...

personally, I dont see why the school system shouldnt have enough money for the whole bit, honestly...Too true, we don't have the problem with out of control athletics budgets that you do over in the states so that probably helps things a bit but we still have people annoyed at the existence of people smarter then themselves who think that the gifted students don't need anything extra and should just be happy being bored (ignoring the problems that often occur in uni if you've managed to get through school with little work, I have direct experience in that).

Well, Im not saying they should slash the aforementioned budgets, for the again, aforementioned reasons, they are required...

but that is why they slashed gifted and not the others, because they can get away with it...

personally I dont think they should be able to get away with slashing an education budget at all...I have no problem with slashing subsidies to private schools (and get rid of faith schools outright).

Of course any government that does that would find the parents of kids who go to private schools not voting for them in the next election.

Here's a thought: If you want more money for the education budget (so cuts don't have to be made), raise taxes.That would be a good idea, although there's a lot of money being spent elsewhere in pretty much every government's budget that isn't doing any good that could be redirected (whether people would accept higher taxes for a higher education budget is another matter).

Another part of the problem is that kids can't vote to increase taxes to pay for a larger education budget.

I guess start by taking look at what we've labeled children with autism and other conditions. We refer to them as special needs. Why? Because they have special needs, needs that they may have trouble coping with on their own without the support they currently receive, or as this case is where I live, the support they need and aren't getting.

Would you rather have them be complete non-functioning members of society? Because that's exactly what many of them would be without the social support we provide for them. Your right in that nearly all of them won't be the doctors and scientists of tomorrow. They still may be functioning or semi-functioning members of society though, however menial their role may seem to you, with the support we provide or should be providing.There's a lot of variation in those who are classified as special needs children, many are very close to normal (especially if anyone who gets any special consideration no matter how minor is listed as special needs) while others will need help their whole life.

These kids need the extra help, and there's no guarantee that they won't become productive members of society. In fact, who are you to decide who is, or is not a productive member of society? These kids need the help, others, do not. Just because you're gifted, or consider yourself such, does not entitle you to special treatment. Having an advantage demands you take hold of it, and use it to the best of your abilities if you wish to get ahead. Don't worry. In High School, you can take honors classes if you really feel like 'contributing'.Very good point about who is to decide who is a productive member of society.

These kids need the help, others, do not. Just because you're gifted, or consider yourself such, does not entitle you to special treatment. Having an advantage demands you take hold of it, and use it to the best of your abilities if you wish to get ahead. Don't worry. In High School, you can take honors classes if you really feel like 'contributing'.Those who have things too easy in school often end up having trouble later on in university when the difficulty rises and they haven't learnt how to handle work that is more than trivially easy for them. The gifted very much do need special treatment, though I suspect that treatment should consist of more work.

I suspect for all the leniency they receive, they'd give it all up to be considered normal.Depends, I doubt many autistics would want to give up better maths ability to fit in.

I think grouping kids by age is the largest issue, especially between 6-10, when variance even among similar ages is enormous.Well we have to group them somehow though I suspect that's part of the problem.

The problem with schools is that you've basically gathered together a large amount of energy balls and you need to control them for 8 hours of the day, little more than large daycare centres really, it means you have to juggle between allowing children to learn at their own pace and forcing in 40 people to a classroom, all with wild variations in learning ability.

So every kid, almost, will feel aggrieved that they aren't receiving the right attention because when you're having to average, no one fits perfectly and so the choice is to place most money and attention on those furthest from the average.A good point. Even worse then that are things like the misnamed No Child Left Behind law in the US which causes schools to leave children who they can't raise above a pass behind and instead focus all their efforts on those they can raise from a fail to a pass (and this also results in them not providing as much help to those that would've passed anyway but could have done better).

Not only should we not educate them, we should stop them from breeding, too.Work is being done on a cure (http://isnt.autistics.org/) for you. Until a cure is found you can learn to live (http://isnt.autistics.org/help.html) with your condition.

Once a black kid at school called me a bitch. I don't know why the government has to waste money on those people.I don't tend to treat bigots very well and you have managed to show yourself to be one.

Work is being done on a cure (http://isnt.autistics.org/) for you. Until a cure is found you can learn to live (http://isnt.autistics.org/help.html) with your condition.

I don't tend to treat bigots very well and you have managed to show yourself to be one.

Oh dear...

Work is being done on a cure (http://isnt.autistics.org/) for you. Until a cure is found you can learn to live (http://isnt.autistics.org/help.html) with your condition.

I don't tend to treat bigots very well and you have managed to show yourself to be one.

You need new batteries for your sarcasm detector. Now.

...sorry, I'm only certified for 8th grade and up ;)
That's ok, I'm back at junior high school so I have plenty of 8th and 9th graders. I can send you a boy who constantly declares that he loves me and wants to know if X (X being anything currently being talked about) likes him too.

We do lose a lot when gifted students who aren't motivated to succeed (as you are) aren't pushed into taking advantage of their abilities, and simply coast through the school system bored and apathetic. We need to pay careful attention on both ends of the curve.

*is still coasting*

That's ok, I'm back at junior high school so I have plenty of 8th and 9th graders. I can send you a boy who constantly declares that he loves me and wants to know if X (X being anything currently being talked about) likes him too.

In exchange, you can have the 14 year old pregnant girl who used to stare at my ass while I was correcting another students paper. Or the 15 year old boy who asked me if I ever thought about kissing 15 year old boys.


Oh, Revere, how I miss thee...

I don't know what's up with your school... but kids who had genuine problems beyond like dyslexia, ADD or Turrets weren't in the same classes as the other kids. They had their own classes. Kids who were learning English as a second language similarly had their own classes. The kids who were of "average" intelligence either learned (or regurgitated or kissed up) and passed or didn't and failed. We didn't have a huge athletics budget though. Actually, nobody gave a rat's ass about the football team.

I was thoroughly bored throughout high school and it would have been useful to me if I'd been challenged because then maybe I would have put some effort into university (going from not having to study to having to do so took some getting used to). And it sucked to be bored all the time, but I found other ways to be intellectually stimulated. For instance, I had a library card. Using said library card, I took out books on anthropology, sociology, astronomy, languages, I brought a "teach yourself Japanese" tape and book set home once. I tried to learn Greek online... and whenever a school project came up that I found interesting, I did it to death (i.e. debates, a project on existentialism...). Just because I sat in class and drew comics mocking my classmates doesn't mean I didn't learn things in my time off (or during class... I definitely read some anthro text books during English class).

And to suggest that the students who have learning disabilities or who have problems where they can't learn as well (as far as you know, the students who were taken out of the room have problems at home such that their scholastic performance is affected) are somehow less deserving of learning is appalling. They are human beings too. They do deserve a chance and they deserve to be the best they can be too. You're not better than they are because you're smart.

When you get to university you will realize that there are a lot of people who are a lot smarter than you, a lot more creative than you and will probably do a lot better than you in life. Maybe some of the classmates you would have tossed aside as worthless will surpass you (it might not be likely, I know where some of the kids from my high school have ended up, but then I have no indication that you're going to make it far, high school grades honestly don't mean anything).

edit: I just noticed that the OP said junior high school, not high school. Those grades matter even less (as in they don't even matter for high school while high school grades matter a little for getting into university, but still don't really serve as an indication of intelligence). Also, some people are late bloomers. I didn't get special treatment, but I definitely got some Cs in junior high and didn't really do amazingly. I was deemed gifted by grade seven (even with non-stellar grades) and put in an occasional special class which consisted of having a teacher talk to you like you're a small adult instead of a kid and doing brain teasers and talking about the dumb kids with the other smart kids. It wasn't spectacular (though it probably helped my social skills a little). I still devoured books on the side (though in grade 7-8 it was more the occult and fiction, I was well into my Stephen King and Michael Crichton phase then).

I'm autistic, not only do I manage to function normally I NEVER went to special education AND I graduated college with a BA and an ASB in only 2 years with a 3.8 GPA, I was a captain on my high school academic team, a member of the student council my junior and senior years, one of the students responsible for decorating the school for exhibition nights, and I continue to be active in my community; I plan on going back to college to get a degree in education and maybe teach technology. All this with no medications, no special education, and no government assistance.

Your assumptions are to put it frankly, insulting.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but if you managed all of that without any help or meds--I'm not saying it wasn't a huge struggle for you, but it doesn't sound like autism. I know not all autism is severe, but it usually... you know...has an impact. And you just made a thread about how you've been on like 20 dates in the past few months. It does not compute.

*blah blah BRUINS TATTOO blah blah*

...while it WOULD be worse to have a Sox tattoo, I am still ashamed on your behalf. Honestly, that's like getting your girlfriend's name in ink. Do you want them to be cursed forever?

(I mean, they will be anyway, but you don't have to feed it, man)

Maybe the gifted ones could work out their own program.
And find the grants to keep it running.
Speaking of running, you would save a ton if you just abolished any sports that use a ball. Maybe we could invent a sport, call it "air soccer"; it might be fun to watch.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but if you managed all of that without any help or meds--I'm not saying it wasn't a huge struggle for you, but it doesn't sound like autism. I know not all autism is severe, but it usually... you know...has an impact. And you just made a thread about how you've been on like 20 dates in the past few months. It does not compute.

I work very hard Ryadn. I'm not quite Asperger's level but beyond the scope of ADD. It does have an impact on me and its a struggle of will to keep up on a daily basis and I have developed a hell of a lot of coping mechanisms. I still suffer a lot of symptoms. I'm just trying to inform the OP that his rant is almost all assumptions and BS.

In exchange, you can have the 14 year old pregnant girl who used to stare at my ass while I was correcting another students paper. Or the 15 year old boy who asked me if I ever thought about kissing 15 year old boys.


Oh, Revere, how I miss thee...

REVEAH! Oh my god, I loved that place. I visited Boston in '02 and ended up in some shitty pseudo-hotel in Revere and it OWNED. You guys really like the Virgin Mary over there. I saw like 10 of them in half-bathtubs on my daily walks to IHOP. The Virgin Mary and Tony C. Not that there is a substantial difference in my heart.

I work very hard Ryadn. I'm not quite Asperger's level but beyond the scope of ADD. It does have an impact on me and its a struggle of will to keep up on a daily basis and I have developed a hell of a lot of coping mechanisms. I still suffer a lot of symptoms. I'm just trying to inform the OP that his rant is almost all assumptions and BS.

Okay. Like I said, I don't mean to be a jerk. When you say "autism" I think of the spectrum beyond Asperger's. I have ADD inattentive type--I know that it can certainly be a struggle even if it appears to be easy. I just tend to think of the spectrum as ADD --> Asperger's --> Autism, in order of severity.

Oh dear...

You need new batteries for your sarcasm detector. Now.

That's what happens when you pirate all the batteries out of remotes instead of buying a new pack. A broken sarcasm detector, and a drawer full of dead AAA's.

Okay. Like I said, I don't mean to be a jerk. When you say "autism" I think of the spectrum beyond Asperger's. I have ADD inattentive type--I know that it can certainly be a struggle even if it appears to be easy. I just tend to think of the spectrum as ADD --> Asperger's --> Autism, in order of severity.

I understand, its quite a bit more complicated than that (I don't even understand it)

So, kenavt, what help do you need? What would be the purpose of programs for gifted children? Are there no AP courses at your school? Why couldn't you advance your own learning?

To be honest, your OP do come off as being an arrogant prick who looks down on those who need help. How do you know they won't contribute to society? Is your mental prowess so great you can see into the future?

I think it would benefit you greatly if you did some volunteer work with the special education department. Maybe that'll bring you back down to earth.

So, kenavt, what help do you need? What would be the purpose of programs for gifted children? Are there no AP courses at your school? Why couldn't you advance your own learning?

To be honest, your OP do come off as being an arrogant prick who looks down on those who need help. How do you know they won't contribute to society? Is your mental prowess so great you can see into the future?

I think it would benefit you greatly if you did some volunteer work with the special education department. Maybe that'll bring you back down to earth.

I doubt it. Imagine how mean he could be to the special needs kids. "Oh my god, why can't you read that? Are you an idiot??"

As an educator and someone who was in both good and crappy GATE programs, I recognize there is a definite need for gifted and talented enrichment. In my class of six-year-olds I have kids who can't write their alphabets and kids who read on a third-grade level or higher. They're ALL frustrated, and I am, too. I have few resources at my disposal beyond second-grade math workbooks and creativity, and my biggest behavior problems are kids who are smart and bored. But clearly, cutting special ed is not the answer. There's an autistic kid in another kinder class at my school who screams and flails randomly (he shouted for a good ten minutes today) but read his mom's PhD thesis. He needs resources, not to be shut in some closet and forgotten.

And just so you know I know where your coming from. A rather large special ed kid grabbed a girls hair and slammed her into a wall my Freshmen year. When I intervened and showed him what it felt like I got suspended.

What....What the fuck dude? Really? really?! Wow...just...just better be glad the parents didn't sue, because at least in my state, assault on a handicap person is a felony.

I doubt it. Imagine how mean he could be to the special needs kids. "Oh my god, why can't you read that? Are you an idiot??"

As an educator and someone who was in both good and crappy GATE programs, I recognize there is a definite need for gifted and talented enrichment. In my class of six-year-olds I have kids who can't write their alphabets and kids who read on a third-grade level or higher. They're ALL frustrated, and I am, too. I have few resources at my disposal beyond second-grade math workbooks and creativity, and my biggest behavior problems are kids who are smart and bored. But clearly, cutting special ed is not the answer. There's an autistic kid in another kinder class at my school who screams and flails randomly (he shouted for a good ten minutes today) but read his mom's PhD thesis. He needs resources, not to be shut in some closet and forgotten.

Ah, well at my high school, they had AP programs, and they had clubs for everything after school. Math club, engineering clubs, etc.

I was mainstreamed at my school, because of my ADD and my learning disability in math.

I agree with you on the resources.

Maybe the gifted ones could work out their own program.
And find the grants to keep it running.
Speaking of running, you would save a ton if you just abolished any sports that use a ball. Maybe we could invent a sport, call it "air soccer"; it might be fun to watch.
I used to think that athletics programs and gym class and such were all a waste. I didn't take a gym class in high school, in fact, although I did wind up taking a strength training class.

Then I wound up on the track team. I developed a little more personal appreciation for what goes on it a sports team. Fine, ok, maybe sports isn't bad to have in school. It shouldn't be prioritized over real education, but mandating gym is a waste.

Then, while I was in college, I wound up working at a weight loss camp. And then I said to myself wow we actually need this in schools. And we need to make sure to encourage sports activities for all kids for the sake of their long term health.

The entertainment value of sports - that, we don't need. We don't need carefully manicured football fields, stadiums, and out of control parents. We need to teach children how to stay in shape, expose children to as many good exercise habits as possible and hope that one thing - running, swimming, playing ball on the weekends - sticks.

...while it WOULD be worse to have a Sox tattoo, I am still ashamed on your behalf. Honestly, that's like getting your girlfriend's name in ink. Do you want them to be cursed forever?

(I mean, they will be anyway, but you don't have to feed it, man)
haha...I got it two years ago when they still sucked too. And now, it's autographed by Ray Bourque :)
REVEAH! Oh my god, I loved that place. I visited Boston in '02 and ended up in some shitty pseudo-hotel in Revere and it OWNED. You guys really like the Virgin Mary over there. I saw like 10 of them in half-bathtubs on my daily walks to IHOP. The Virgin Mary and Tony C. Not that there is a substantial difference in my heart.
Ah, Revere Beach...home of heroin needles and used condoms.

Once a black kid at school called me a bitch. I don't know why the government has to waste money on those people.

I never said to stop funding; I pondered as to why it seems one group gets more funding while others are the victims of cut back; as if being an average student means you don't deserve adequate funding. As if it means the average student gets less overall academic attention than those in special ed. Resources in my opinion seemed to be more scarce for the average class.

I'm sorry, I'm really not looking for a citation, but are you fucking kidding me? Did you get mad when the kids in wheelchairs didn't have to run track, too?

No, I got mad when I was attacked for no seemingly damn good reason (unless you count that I was trying to tell someone that I didn't want to be their friend any more, and that person happened to be a friend of that kid). Why should I have been punished for something someone else does?

And in answer to your snarky question, no, I never did. I was jealous because I had to suffer at the hands of sadistic P.E. teachers who seemed to go out of their way to torment those of us who didn't want to be in P.E. class.

I have a question for you: if you were bullied, never saw your aggressors punished (of course, you weren't punished either, so there is still some form of perverse equity here), and one day, was attacked unprovoked by a special ed student only to find yourself being punished, would you not be mad, resentful of your treatment?

Two people commit the same crime of assault.

One of them is mentally handicapped, and honestly didn't understand that what they were doing would have the consequences it did.

The other person did it with full knowledge of outcome, and intent to cause that outcome.

Should both be punished equally? (don't even bring up mens rea, I'm just saying :p)

I can't bring it up? Fine, then, let's focus on actus rea :p - the guilty act itself ;). So long as schools are going to tout their zero tolerance policies as the absolute solution to all their problems, then yes, both students should be punished equally.

I'm not saying you deserved any punishment at all. But I have worked with special needs kids, and yes, they do need a lot more attention and help, but they also face obstacles that you or I never had to. Not a one of them chose those disabilities.

Since it's obvious they require more help and attention, it seems contradictory to leave those types of students unsupervised in a yard with other students who are able to appreciate the consequences of their actions. And one or two teachers in a yard with hundreds is not adequate supervision; I believe. Especially if the student may be prone to bursts of violent behaviour, which is a threat to others.

The issue of funding drives me nuts though, because the education budget being slashed is a very old meme. The problem is, as Poli pointed out, sitting here bitching about how we should proportion the rapidly shrinking pie is missing the point. Funding overall needs to be increased. Of all the essential services we as a society value, education seems the most obviously important on its face. Yet when we descend into these debates, that fact gets lost. All of a sudden it's the Arts versus Physical Education versus Academics versus Special Needs. Divide and conquer, baby.

Divide and conquering happens because people have different values, and when we're told money is tight, we're more inclined to push for support of the values we believe are important in education.

Another thing, people are divided across a spectrum of those who can provide explanations and those who can draw conclusions, there's a difference. Of course, some excel at both and some suck at both, the spectrum is circular.

The education system heavily favours those who provide explanations - I was given half marks for the correct answer in math and half points for the correct working out, as an example - and a fair proportion of the population don't fit in with that. Hence plenty of intelligent people fall through the system. The purpose of education is to see whether you succeed at the task of education, a reliable indicator for fitting into the system of business. Hence many in business spend most of their time reporting on what the business has been doing, 50% of which has been reporting.

Education makes little distinction, it's a fit the square-into-the-circle solution to mass bringing up children while their parents work.

I never said to stop funding; I pondered as to why it seems one group gets more funding while others are the victims of cut back; as if being an average student means you don't deserve adequate funding. As if it means the average student gets less overall academic attention than those in special ed. Resources in my opinion seemed to be more scarce for the average class.
I agree everyone should be given adequate funding and support, but is it really surprising, or controversial, that special needs kids get more attention?

They have, after all, special needs which must be met.

I'm sure the conversation has moved way past this but I have to go so I need to make this hit and run, sorry.

And am I such a child? I will be honest - no. Parents, check, motivation, check, thirst... I feel so. I just want to be the best that I can be, and I feel that I am not getting it from the system.


I transferred to the four year college with awards in my field, the work I was doing recognized as really very good by the professors I had. I sat back and thought, "Clearly, I'm awesome. I'll just sit back and wait for the opportunities to work my obvious talent to roll right in." Meanwhile, a classmate who wasn't as clever as I thought I was scrambled around, tapped resources until he got some, worked angles, organized people (including myself) and actually got things done.

I'm now working for that guy. Clearly I'm not as clever as I thought.

There are a few morals here. First, you get out what you put in. You might as well learn this now, there isn't anyone waiting around to pat you on the head for being such a clever little boy. Not to sound libertarian or anything, but it's every man for himself. You can get some folks to share a liferaft with you, but their only interested if you're going to help man the raft, not to 'foster' you. If you want more from the system, put more in. Stop waiting for everyone to notice how clever you are.

Second, you're not as clever as you think you are and the people around you are not headed where you think. You might as well get over yourself now so it doesn't sting as much when you find yourself working for your classmate later in life because she made better use of the networking opportunities school provides.

What....What the fuck dude? Really? really?! Wow...just...just better be glad the parents didn't sue, because at least in my state, assault on a handicap person is a felony.



Thats nice. as I mentioned elsewhere the second he was no longer harming her I was no longer touching him. I doubt intervening to protect someone else from harm is a felony, even if it is a retard perpetrating it.

What do you think?

It's a big mistake to overlook gifted kids. Y'all probably won't become the next Ted Bundy, but y'all won't live up to your real potential, either. School is so watered down, nowadays, that the gifted programs are essential in keeping good kids interested in academics.

The schools are way too anxious to include special ed kids in normal classrooms and one of our local counties has gone too far in that direction. Special needs kids should be taught in special needs classrooms.

Balancing the budget ought to see a few administrators fired before any teaching staff is cut. Never happens, though, does it? I can't imagine that EVERY public school administrator is essential.

I would ask first of all why no one had the IMHO rather obvious idea just to change to a school, probably private, which is not that watered down. The second question is why people insist that the disabled should be in normal classrooms. I was in a sped school until the 5th grade and in a normal Gymnasium (roughly equivalent to junior high and high school in my neck of the woods). I did get almost no assistence there and it seriously sucked. Teachers doubted that my disablity is real and I got almost no support (and the times, I got some, it was really embarrasing).

My background:

I was a "gifted" student. Fucked if I know how I was identified as "gifted," but I was in "gifted programs" by first grade. I stayed in those programs throughout my entire public school education. My high school gifted ed teacher, Joel, is personally responsible for keeping me from dropping out at one point. I obviously believe in supporting gifted education. If it wasn't for the gifted program in my high school, I wouldn't have graduated.

What makes my perspective maybe a little different is that I've got a kid brother who is at the other end of the spectrum.

My brother has a number of cognitive deficits. He's a pretty normal teenager, loves his Nintendo DS and Facebook, etc. But he struggles in school and always has. His biggest problem is that he has an auditory processing delay, which means that if you say something to him it will take 4-5 seconds before he actually "hears" you. He has needed special assistance in school since the beginning, and he's now finishing up his Junior year.

Here's what I think:

The biggest mistake I see people make on this subject is thinking that "special needs" and "gifted" can't go together. At 15, I had run away from home a couple times, I was using drugs routinely, committing several different sorts of crime on a regular basis, and--though I wouldn't know this until years later--I was clinically depressed and having anxiety attacks. Most of my teachers and most of the school staff took a look at my grades (straight A's) and assumed I was fine. After all, how fucked up could I possibly be, if I was doing all my homework?

My gifted ed teacher was a guy who had been working with gifted kids for something like 30 years. He could recognize a kid like me. He had the time and the budget to deal with kids like me.

My brother and I are exactly alike in this way. It took a specialist to recognize that my brother isn't mentally retarded, but rather that he has language processing problems and can't communicate as well as he can think. It took a specialist to recognize that I was a struggling kid even if my GPA was immaculate. Those specialists weren't highly paid, and they weren't people who had earned super-advanced doctoral degrees, they were teachers and councilors who had been given the time and the budget and the training to help kids like my brother and I.


Anyhow, long story short: my family would have a pair of dropouts if it weren't for "special ed" programs at BOTH ends of the spectrum.

If it wasn't for the gifted program in my high school, I wouldn't have graduated.

a while back i took a brief glance at the lit to see if anyone had gotten actual numbers on risks and outcomes facing gifted students under a variety of conditions. didn't come up with much solid, but anecdotally i know that this is not uncommon at all. one of the smartest kids i knew had a number of issues that wound up really hurting him - mildly fucked up home life, wasn't identified as gifted early on, etc. he wound up being more or less abandoned by the system and burned himself out on drugs. seems to be doing ok now, but didn't go anywhere near as far as he could have.

And every day at school, I actually go to learn - or at least learn the basic things so I can go to a nice engineering college (hopefully MIT) and unveil my smarts upon the world for the better.
Why not go somewhere that's ostensibly not that good and succeed regardless if you're the genius you claim to be?

Egalitarianism is completely out of control in western society. School priorities are just another example of this.

Equality before the law =! similarity of abilities or outcomes.

Egalitarianism is completely out of control in western society. School priorities are just another example of this.
Oh fuck off. If we have people who are just Abject Failures, that's a tax drain for every day of their life. If they get some skills and find work, that burden is lessened.

Why not go somewhere that's ostensibly not that good and succeed regardless if you're the genius you claim to be?
Because genius doesn't make a kid immune to problems?

I had just about the cushiest life possible. Middle class, loving home with great family, safe neighborhood, two PhD-educated parents, good food, clean water, etc etc etc. And I still almost was a high school drop-out.

Because genius doesn't make a kid immune to problems?

I had just about the cushiest life possible. Middle class, loving home with great family, safe neighborhood, two PhD-educated parents, good food, clean water, etc etc etc. And I still almost was a high school drop-out.

Social Conservatives tell me thats because you did drugs. And didnt love Jesus. *nod*

Because genius doesn't make a kid immune to problems?

I had just about the cushiest life possible. Middle class, loving home with great family, safe neighborhood, two PhD-educated parents, good food, clean water, etc etc etc. And I still almost was a high school drop-out.
How would going to MIT change that?

The only thing keeping me going at uni is my pals and substance abuse, which would doubtless be the same at the University of Scunthorpe or at Cambridge.

How would going to MIT change that?

Huh?


The only thing keeping me going at uni is my pals and substance abuse, which would doubtless be the same at the University of Scunthorpe or at Cambridge.
Seriously, huh?

I don't get what point you're making.

EDIT: I should at least take a guess, so here goes.

It seems like you're claiming that problems will be problems no matter where you go. But that's obviously quite false. If I had gone to a school without the gifted ed program that my school had, I most likely wouldn't have graduated from high school at all. The existence of a support system in one place and the lack of said support system in another place can make a massive difference.

Huh?
The guy claims he needs to go to MIT to solve the world's problems single-handedly, dunno about that myself.
It seems like you're claiming that problems will be problems no matter where you go. But that's obviously quite false. If I had gone to a school without the gifted ed program that my school had, I most likely wouldn't have graduated from high school at all. The existence of a support system in one place and the lack of said support system in another place can make a massive difference.
Different strokes for different folks, I suppose, I got through school OK despite the lack of a Super Gifted Programme.

The guy claims he needs to go to MIT to solve the world's problems single-handedly, dunno about that myself.

He's about one-quarter right.

It's true that the cache of your undergrad institution counts for something. It's also true that the kind of education you have access to can be very different depending on where you go to school. So he's right about the fact that going to a community college probably wouldn't give him the same kind of world-class education that MIT might offer.

On the other hand, it's extremely easy to go to a "top tier" school and get a shit education. For instance, I've learned that the undergrad pre-med track at BU (where I went) was far more rigorous and more harshly graded than the pre-med track at Harvard, just across the river. While Harvard pre-med track kids enjoyed some routine grad inflation, the pre-med program at BU was experimenting with grade-DEflation when I was there, such that a C in my program was equivalent to a B in the Harvard program. If a kid WANTED to slack a bit in the Harvard program, it wouldn't hurt their GPA as much as slacking in the BU program would.

None of which means that Harvard isn't a great school, I'm just saying that it's wrong to assume Harvard is necessarily going to be "more challenging" in every way simply because it's Harvard. And likewise to MIT. The name alone doesn't guarantee that every student will get the most out of their education there.


Likewise :confused:

This guy is on about how he's so top etc., you're on about how despite being very MC you still nearly dropped out of high school. Am a bit bemused, sorry.
I guess my point is that you can't just take a brilliant kid, stick them in any environment at all, and expect them to succeed. Brilliant kids are often extremely irrational or careless or unstable, just like any kid might be. Kids who are school-gifted are very often not life-gifted.

Oh fuck off. If we have people who are just Abject Failures, that's a tax drain for every day of their life. If they get some skills and find work, that burden is lessened.

I never suggested anything along the lines of branding anyone a failure. But thank you for telling me what I meant.

Disincentivising excellence in the name of egalitarianism, as in high marginal income taxes in the real world, or proceeding at a snails pace that bores high achievers in school, is commonplace.

<snark>And if there's one thing that economics teaches us, it's that incentives don't matter.</snark>

I could've been in a "gifted" program in high school. But to be honest, the only real difference was that they made you learn more trivial crap that ultimately provided no benefit whatsoever after high school. Hell, the only good thing I got out of my AP classes was not having to take them again in college...busting my ass for marginal added benefit, if any at all, really wasn't a good deal. It had nothing really to do with learning but plenty to do with memorization and meaningless work.

Now, on the other hand, special education has its own problems. I think, honestly, it's mostly a source of sinecures and funding for the school district more than anything else. Especially since it seems a lot of the programs don't do a whole lot to help the kids; we had tons of problems with discipline with the special-ed department, and it seemed like everyone involved treated it like a day-care where they could dump the kids on to somebody else for eight hours rather than actually attempt to improve their skills or behavior.

Personally, I think the system should be structured according to different post-secondary tracks starting in 8th or 9th grade. Some people can pursue a path that will lead to a university or junior college, others can do trades or the military, and others can just get their GED and move on. That way, you don't have people who couldn't give two shits about calculus or physics (like me) taking classes relevant to their interests and career path without wasting their time on things that are irrelevant to them. We need to get away from the idea that vocational programs or the military, or any other non-collegiate track are somehow "inferior" and should be dismantled in favor of trying to force everyone to go to college.

--snip--
(I'm sorry if I'll sound like I'm self-aggrandizing, but I think I have to tell where I'm coming from.)

I'm a consistent honor student, from kindergarten to college, and is currently in med school my country's top medical school. I am smart, at least that's what people think about me... and I have an autistic brother (not Asperger's - worse than that).

I live in a country in which public education is low on funding. The only public elementary school offering special ed classes near us is in the city (1-2 hours away) - with only one teacher, with her class of 20+ of children with autism and Down's syndrome stretching her schedule and her energies to the limit. Athletics in public schools are poorly funded, and if it exists, it is mostly due to out-of-pocket contributions by the students and the parents. And special teachers for gifted children like you? Nonexistent.

Should our education budget be increased? Hell yeah. As many posters have pointed out, raising the budget for the education should be the focus, not where to slash and scrimp.

Going back to the OP, I feel offended by the implication that children with special needs are somehow unproductive and that money spent on them is wasted. There are many people who would prove to you otherwise. My autistic brother had since transferred to a normal school had just finished sixth grade, in a normal class. He, the autistic student, was elected a class officer by his classmates. He is the president of the Art Club. And the people who believed in him were normal students. I could see my brother being productive.

Do you see your brother being productive? Do you see his potential? People with special needs also have hopes and dreams. I think it's high time for you to look at his potential, hopes, and dreams and help him achieve it. You have the gifts to help, why don't you use it?

Also, if you don't have those gifted classes, why don't you do something about it? Do you really need those gifted classes? Why, you can develop your knowledge and stimulate your mind by other means. Many other posters suggested ways on doing that. (And perhaps you can include your brother too!) This country has no gifted classes, yet there are people who succeeded in developing their talents. Truly gifted people know how to use their talents and not let it go to waste.

The guy claims he needs to go to MIT to solve the world's problems single-handedly, dunno about that myself.

Different strokes for different folks, I suppose, I got through school OK despite the lack of a Super Gifted Programme.
Most MIT grads are like that. I didn't know that the smugness was so pervasive with the pre-matriculated crowd.

Agreed, in principle. As much as the principle of focusing resources on able students is, to my mind, valid, the stupid, irresponsible and disabled should still be give sufficient provision so as to allow them to be functioning members of society. Mr. Felix was correct that you can't make a diamond of a turd.

Personally, I think the system should be structured according to different post-secondary tracks starting in 8th or 9th grade. Some people can pursue a path that will lead to a university or junior college, others can do trades or the military, and others can just get their GED and move on. That way, you don't have people who couldn't give two shits about calculus or physics (like me) taking classes relevant to their interests and career path without wasting their time on things that are irrelevant to them. We need to get away from the idea that vocational programs or the military, or any other non-collegiate track are somehow "inferior" and should be dismantled in favor of trying to force everyone to go to college.

I am Wilgrove and I agree with this statement.

Personally, I think the system should be structured according to different post-secondary tracks starting in 8th or 9th grade. Some people can pursue a path that will lead to a university or junior college, others can do trades or the military, and others can just get their GED and move on. That way, you don't have people who couldn't give two shits about calculus or physics (like me) taking classes relevant to their interests and career path without wasting their time on things that are irrelevant to them. We need to get away from the idea that vocational programs or the military, or any other non-collegiate track are somehow "inferior" and should be dismantled in favor of trying to force everyone to go to college.

or we could instead make sure everybody has the basic intellectual toolkit and cultural grounding necessary to fully participate in a democratic society and worry about the job training later. how does one even decide what matters to one's future career path at 14? it doesn't even seem to be particularly obvious in your 20s and 30s.

or we could instead make sure everybody has the basic intellectual toolkit and cultural grounding necessary to fully participate in a democratic society and worry about the job training later. how does one even decide what matters to one's future career path at 14? it doesn't even seem to be particularly obvious in your 20s and 30s.

thats true, this is me even at 20 thinking about it right now:

http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-ahhh1gv.gif

thats true, this is me even at 20 thinking about it right now:

http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-ahhh1gv.gif

heh, yeah exactly.

moreover, who the fuck knows what a) you'll be interested in and b) the economy will look like in 25 years? not the school, not the government, and certainly not you, that's for sure.

so what are we to do in the face of future uncertainty? give people tools. logic and critical thinking, research skills, numeracy, scientific literacy, cultural literacy, regular literacy, verbal and written communication skills, creativity in both thinking and artistic expression, etc. this shit ought be required for everyone. if it turns out you don't wind up needing it down the road, at least you haven't been hindered by lacking it, unlike the other way around, which just sets people up to be fucked over later on.

when you have the toolkit, you can adapt to whatever comes at you. without it, well, you still identify as a logger despite the mill having been shut down 20 years ago. which just sucks and does no good for anyone.

I never said to stop funding; I pondered as to why it seems one group gets more funding while others are the victims of cut back; as if being an average student means you don't deserve adequate funding. As if it means the average student gets less overall academic attention than those in special ed. Resources in my opinion seemed to be more scarce for the average class.
Special ed gets more funding on a per pupil basis because:

1. They require more funding. I'm sorry to tell you this, Kryo, but long gone are the days when it's acceptable to toss special ed kids into a closet and leave them there.

2. Such funding (At least in the US) is guaranteed by law, again to keep people from abandoning the kids off in some classroom and writing them off.

I have a question for you: if you were bullied, never saw your aggressors punished (of course, you weren't punished either, so there is still some form of perverse equity here), and one day, was attacked unprovoked by a special ed student only to find yourself being punished, would you not be mad, resentful of your treatment?
Sure I would be resentful... if I was the same age as my students. As an adult, I'm supposed to know more and take into account the various circumstances. Or to put it another way for you, if I and a newbie get into a flame war here, who are you going to smack down harder? The new guy with, say, 10 posts under his belt who didn't even know the OSRS exists or me, who's been here a number of years has close to the magic 10,000 number and should damn well know better?

I've seen you at work as a Mod and how you try to gently correct new comers so I know the answer to that. Teachers do exactly the same.

I can't bring it up? Fine, then, let's focus on actus rea :p - the guilty act itself ;). So long as schools are going to tout their zero tolerance policies as the absolute solution to all their problems, then yes, both students should be punished equally.
Again, not too sure about Canada, but in the US, there are laws that relate to just what you can and cannot do with special ed kids, zero tolerance be damned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Act#Discipline_of_a_child_with_a_disability

Divide and conquering happens because people have different values, and when we're told money is tight, we're more inclined to push for support of the values we believe are important in education.
As my special ed professor said, and something I have taken to heart as my own personal philosophy of education, being fair means giving each child what he or she needs to succeed, not just treating them as if they were all equal.

I have strong feelings about this topic because I am a teacher, and because I manage to hit all three categories of special ed in the US. I'm section 504 due to a physical disability (Deaf in one ear), I'm special ed due to ADD and LD's in spelling and math (And yes, I am well aware of the irony of someone with a spelling learning disability being employed as an English teacher), and I had a high enough IQ that I was in the gifted and talented program at school (Like I said, I'm special). During my school career I needed that extra help. Sometimes it was simply needing to always sit at the front of the class to the left of the board so that I could hear everything, other times it was need of a speech therapist to help me correct my pronunciation because, again, I couldn't hear the words properly. My special ed teachers worked hard to keep me in school, in focus, and not let me get away with excusing poor performance on my disabilities. Hell, it was my special ed teacher in junior high who inspired me to become a teacher myself. And it was my experience in being in all three categories that made me swear to do my utmost as a teacher for these kids because their lives are not easy. It's not fun. And it's not just a way to get out of work.

And as for those who think that special ed kids cannot go on to be productive, in 2004 I graduated with my MS in Counseling and Educational Psychology, with honors. And now, I am an in service teacher teaching English at a junior high school in Japan. If that isn't being productive, I don't know what is.

Sure I would be resentful... if I was the same age as my students. As an adult, I'm supposed to know more and take into account the various circumstances. Or to put it another way for you, if I and a newbie get into a flame war here, who are you going to smack down harder? The new guy with, say, 10 posts under his belt who didn't even know the OSRS exists or me, who's been here a number of years has close to the magic 10,000 number and should damn well know better?

I've seen you at work as a Mod and how you try to gently correct new comers so I know the answer to that. Teachers do exactly the same.

Actually, given that you've pretty much got a clean slate, you wouldn't be slapped any harder than the newbie, though you would be more likely to be given the snide comment over an explanation/reminder of the rules. The severity of the punishment would not be any different, just the wording. After all, it is the same offence and both records are spotless. The veteran poster would not automatically get "smack down harder" unless they were notorious for that kind of behaviour and it was obvious they haven't learned.

I have strong feelings about this topic because I am a teacher, and because I manage to hit all three categories of special ed in the US. I'm section 504 due to a physical disability (Deaf in one ear), I'm special ed due to ADD and LD's in spelling and math (And yes, I am well aware of the irony of someone with a spelling learning disability being employed as an English teacher), and I had a high enough IQ that I was in the gifted and talented program at school (Like I said, I'm special). During my school career I needed that extra help. Sometimes it was simply needing to always sit at the front of the class to the left of the board so that I could hear everything, other times it was need of a speech therapist to help me correct my pronunciation because, again, I couldn't hear the words properly. My special ed teachers worked hard to keep me in school, in focus, and not let me get away with excusing poor performance on my disabilities. Hell, it was my special ed teacher in junior high who inspired me to become a teacher myself. And it was my experience in being in all three categories that made me swear to do my utmost as a teacher for these kids because their lives are not easy. It's not fun. And it's not just a way to get out of work.

We're both disabled, yet I have a completely different opinion of it. And like you, strong feelings from personal experience. Not just from being exposed to special needs students but because I wasn't "normal" in the eyes of a schoolboard that couldn't wait to label anyone who was different.

I hated being treated differently; I hated special ed on a personal level because of my hearing loss. I hated being treated differently; I hated the speech therapist; I hated having teachers treat me like I was a mutant, and always check up to see if i was wearing those horrid hearing aids. It's not a significant hearing loss, but enough that I have no sense of smell - and we won't even go into my physical disability, which was only visible as an adolescent. I hated being told I 'had' ADD/ADHD (no, I just have a low tolerance for stupid, conformist tripe) when it was mostly teachers who didn't like that I coloured outside the lines; that I was 'different'. How I wanted to be treated equally. I hid my disability in high school and in college.

That way, no one would treat me differently; I hated being special, and I didn't want to deal with those types of teachers. I wanted to learn through doing, not being treated with special kiddie gloves. Yes, I was forced to go to a special class in grade 2. My parents wouldn't have any of it, which I am thankful for. I was normal; as normal as normal can be; I was able to learn in a regular classroom. As if I needed help reading. I know my pronunciation isn't perfect, but the speech pathologist was a worthless condescending twat who went out of her way to make me feel inferior. She couldn't have been more fake if she tried. And the gall of the school to bring her, and MAKE me go see her. At least I was able to feign ignorance and get rid of her "help" because I was in high school and my parents never knew.

Public education is for a basic education for the general populous. Your brother and "his type" have a right to that education, and they have a right (legally and I'll say morally) to get as much help as they need to achieve a basic education. You are receiving a basic education, you want more? Pay for it.

I'm all for gifted kids programs and I think they are really important (former gifted kid and mother to two) but special ed isn't something you can cut. The way it works is cuts from the top down, it's not the ideal but it's the fairest.

Why don't you use some of your brains to help the kid who is "struggling" but has "nothing wrong with him"?

Kenavt, sounds like more than your brother has ass-burgers. Go back to your hugbox, the both of you.

Mah na mah na.

Special needs people are worth less than the bullet it would take to kill them.

My honest opinion.

Sure I would be resentful... if I was the same age as my students. As an adult, I'm supposed to know more and take into account the various circumstances.

I have strong feelings about this topic because I am a teacher, and because I manage to hit all three categories of special ed in the US. I'm section 504 due to a physical disability (Deaf in one ear), I'm special ed due to ADD and LD's in spelling and math (And yes, I am well aware of the irony of someone with a spelling learning disability being employed as an English teacher), and I had a high enough IQ that I was in the gifted and talented program at school

All of this. I'm a teacher, and I was in GATE with 504 accommodations in school--not that any of them were ever upheld until high school. Apparently a second set of books for home so I didn't have to jump the fence at school was too much to ask for from many teachers. Both experiences--being at the "gifted" and "impaired" levels of special ed--have helped me so much in my development as a teacher. While I am decidedly NOT one of those "every trauma is a lesson" type of people, those experiences did teach me a great deal about compassion and looking beyond behavior to the source.

Special needs people are worth less than the bullet it would take to kill them.

My honest opinion.

Bullets can be expensive, I hear.

Internet BS, sadly, is free of charge.

Public education is for a basic education for the general populous. Your brother and "his type" have a right to that education, and they have a right (legally and I'll say morally) to get as much help as they need to achieve a basic education. You are receiving a basic education, you want more? Pay for it.

I'm all for gifted kids programs and I think they are really important (former gifted kid and mother to two) but special ed isn't something you can cut. The way it works is cuts from the top down, it's not the ideal but it's the fairest.

Why don't you use some of your brains to help the kid who is "struggling" but has "nothing wrong with him"?

Because it's a waste of time? Educational provision for the mentally handicapped could be happpily cut, and, frankly, the funds would be better used to cultivate the minds of those with a greater chance of making something of themselves.

Special needs people are worth less than the bullet it would take to kill them.

My honest opinion.

Leaving aside the utter evil that is killing a thinking, feeling, intelligent being because you find it defective or inconviniant, "special needs people" is an incredibly broad and diverse groups. I would not be at all surprised if by some standards, you yourself qualify as "special needs." Probably just about everyone does in some way. So where's the magic cut-off where you're life is suddenly worth something?:mad:

Leaving aside the utter evil that is killing a thinking, feeling, intelligent being because you find it defective or inconviniant, "special needs people" is an incredibly broad and diverse groups. I would not be at all surprised if by some standards, you yourself qualify as "special needs." Probably just about everyone does in some way. So where's the magic cut-off where you're life is suddenly worth something?:mad:
I'm gonna guess that his answer will be that he includes himself in the ones whose life is worth nothing.

Despite the general rant-ish nature of the OP, I do see his point, and immensely sympathise. Maybe because when I was in grade 8, I was attacked by a "special ed" student. I was pushed onto iced pavement. The kid didn't even get told that his actions were wrong. I wound up in the VP's office. I was innocent. I was in tears and my head hurt like a bitch. Next thing I knew, I was told I had to go help out in the special ed class so I could see that they needed help more than discipline. I was given detention and wasted several English classes there. Just because I doing an independent project as opposed to the assigned novel. To this day, I still resent all the money spent on these types of students, and the lack of money in comparison spent on the general student population; on the average student who may or may not be the next greatest inventory but will have a lot to offer at the end of the day.

My school didn't think so. They punished the innocent. I know that kid never so much as got a finger wag. And that, is inequitable and wrong.

Looking at the OP, I can see that the Autistic student who disturbed the class got lax punishment, whereas if it had been another; an average student, they would have been punished. Another case of inequities in public schools.
...

What Ryadn said.

...

What Ryadn said.

What's wrong is inequality. If a student can't function without being a threat to others, and that threat is not adequately addressed, there is a problem, especially if supervision has failed to compensate. If students are to share the same space, they need to be treated equally, even if some need more attention than others. Disruption should never be excused; violence should never be excused. It should be properly addressed; how it's addressed should depend on the approach needed to rectify the situation, but it shouldn't be forgiven, ever. Especially if schools want to use zero tolerance as a means of keeping the peace.

As a teacher, I think the worst thing they ever did in my country is remove special schools and try to mainstream kids. It's not fair on special needs students that they don't have teachers trained to deal with them, not fair on the classes of non-special needs kids that have to put up with them, and not fair on the teacher who now has to make amendments to their planning. It just means that those students just below benchmark for their year level fall further behind, gifted kids get bored, and the special needs students feel alienated.

Many of the students I'm talking about are the people who will end up in sheltered workshops and group homes. I was teaching a 15 year old who wasn't toilet trained. I was not prepared to deal with that, and neither were the other students. It's important to recognise and validate the feelings of "normal" students in some instances.

Special needs people are worth less than the bullet it would take to kill them.

My honest opinion.
Your troll opinion.

Because it's a waste of time? Educational provision for the mentally handicapped could be happpily cut, and, frankly, the funds would be better used to cultivate the minds of those with a greater chance of making something of themselves.
Everyone has a chance to make something of themselves. Not all children who are special needs are mentally handicapped, and even those that are have vastly varying levels of mental aptitude. Many people who were sent away to live in a "program" are mainstreamed for the most part at school now and are able to graduate and work to support themselves, they don't all work at NASA but many of them work in my community and they are part of our community. I am glad that they have been given a chance to receive what they have a right to and prove themselves capable.



As a teacher, I think the worst thing they ever did in my country is remove special schools and try to mainstream kids. It's not fair on special needs students that they don't have teachers trained to deal with them, not fair on the classes of non-special needs kids that have to put up with them, and not fair on the teacher who now has to make amendments to their planning. It just means that those students just below benchmark for their year level fall further behind, gifted kids get bored, and the special needs students feel alienated.
Special needs children should be mainstreamed as much as they are able to be. If they are not able to be in class they should receive extra help elsewhere. We have paraprofessionals here to help some kids with mainstreaming, some of them get to go to all their classes with average kids and some only get to go to parts of class or certain activities (like music class or P.E.) it seems to work when the school is adequately funded and staffed. The problems you are talking about are possibly stemming from inadequate planning and funding rather than the children themselves.

Many of the students I'm talking about are the people who will end up in sheltered workshops and group homes. I was teaching a 15 year old who wasn't toilet trained. I was not prepared to deal with that, and neither were the other students. It's important to recognise and validate the feelings of "normal" students in some instances.
Indeed. It sounds like that student wasn't receiving the help he needs and should have had some more accommodation.

Because it's a waste of time? Educational provision for the mentally handicapped could be happpily cut, and, frankly, the funds would be better used to cultivate the minds of those with a greater chance of making something of themselves.
I know appealing to your morals and humanity won't work, so I'll appeal to your wallet instead. Would you really rather pay to keep all uneducated and unemployable special needs students on benefits rather than have as many as possible educated and have a chance at getting on the job market? It may take effort, but it can be, and is, done, and rightly so.

On the other hand, what to gifted kids need to be 'cultivated'? Surely anyone who considers himself or herself gifted should be more than capable of independent learning.

What's wrong is inequality. If a student can't function without being a threat to others, and that threat is not adequately addressed, there is a problem, especially if supervision has failed to compensate. If students are to share the same space, they need to be treated equally, even if some need more attention than others. Disruption should never be excused; violence should never be excused. It should be properly addressed; how it's addressed should depend on the approach needed to rectify the situation, but it shouldn't be forgiven, ever. Especially if schools want to use zero tolerance as a means of keeping the peace.
The federal law that mandates special attention, currently known as IDEA, I believe, has a clause about all students having the right to the least restrictive academic environment. If this were, in fact, applied to all students, it could provide a meaningful guideline for where and when to practice inclusion.

On the other hand, what to gifted kids need to be 'cultivated'? Surely anyone who considers himself or herself gifted should be more than capable of independent learning.
Not all of the gifted and talented have an easy time with learning - or motivating themselves - independently. Or, for that matter, in recognizing their own abilities.

It is often not the straight-A ambitious honors student who needs different treatment in order to bring their abilities to the fore. It is the distracted student, the socially awkward student, the terminally bored student, the student whose self-image is at odds with reality, the students who combine psychological handicaps with stellar abilities who requires different treatment in order to engage them, to reach them, and to get them through school. Because having a gift is not the same as knowing how to use it.

Let me expand on "bored." Boredom for gifted students starts early, and if not addressed and channeled, boredom can rapidly expand into disrespect for teachers, for the institution of education, et cetera; to behavior ranging from disruptive to outright criminal.

Gifted children tend to have "special needs" as well. Anybody who falls on the fringes of the normal curve by any psychological measure is likely to struggle if the teachers don't in some fashion try to accommodate that difference.

I have a good friend who has a reading disorder (read very slow and had a lot of trouble with it) and had an 'aid' until her sophmore year of highschool when she voluntarially got rid of said aid.

And shes smarter then 90% of the people Ive ever met, both online and irl. She got into an excellent private college and will be graduating a year earlier and enroll in one of the best medical schools in the country.

Just because your 'special needs' doesnt mean you cant make something of yourself.

I have a good friend who has a reading disorder (read very slow and had a lot of trouble with it) and had an 'aid' until her sophmore year of highschool when she voluntarially got rid of said aid.

And shes smarter then 90% of the people Ive ever met, both online and irl. She got into an excellent private college and will be graduating a year earlier and enroll in one of the best medical schools in the country.

Just because your 'special needs' doesnt mean you cant make something of yourself.

Zomg, unsupported anecdote, your a liar, et cetera, et cetera.:p

Zomg, unsupported anecdote, your a liar, et cetera, et cetera.:p

Normally I wouldnt bother with anecdotes, but in this type of thread, it seems all anyone is going to rely on are anecdotes, and all the zomgs special needs kidz are WORTHLESS is kinda....annoying;)

Normally I wouldnt bother with anecdotes, but in this type of thread, it seems all anyone is going to rely on are anecdotes, and all the zomgs special needs kidz are WORTHLESS is kinda....annoying;)

WAIT!? :eek:




This thread was about special needs kids?

Normally I wouldnt bother with anecdotes, but in this type of thread, it seems all anyone is going to rely on are anecdotes, and all the zomgs special needs kidz are WORTHLESS is kinda....annoying;)

Annoying? I was thinking depressing, but two sides of the same coin. ;)

The federal law that mandates special attention, currently known as IDEA, I believe, has a clause about all students having the right to the least restrictive academic environment. If this were, in fact, applied to all students, it could provide a meaningful guideline for where and when to practice inclusion.

In theory, it could work; in practice, it could easily take more funding and time, especially if a student under disability seems likely to function adequately in an inclusion environment but in reality proves to be difficult. Would educators have enough patience for this kind of practice when they're over-burdened with large-size classes?

I know appealing to your morals and humanity won't work, so I'll appeal to your wallet instead. Would you really rather pay to keep all uneducated and unemployable special needs students on benefits rather than have as many as possible educated and have a chance at getting on the job market? It may take effort, but it can be, and is, done, and rightly so.

On the other hand, what to gifted kids need to be 'cultivated'? Surely anyone who considers himself or herself gifted should be more than capable of independent learning.

TJ Hairball has offered an excellent rebuttal of the second parapgraph, which I largely agree with. An education system in which the focus is on the lowest common denominator and ensuring mediocrity for all is unlikely to captivate or enthuse an able but socially awkward student, or one not totally self-motivated.

In regard to the first paragraph; firstly, as has been outlined more times than I recall, in TBC's Britain, they wouldn't be recieving many benefits at all, hence they would be of little direct fiscal cost. However, on a more general level, I accept that sufficient provision must be made so as to ensure they are, if not active and erudite members of society, than still employable, tax-paying members. Hence, I'd sooner remove those with little ability or academic acuity from an "academic" education and curriculum at 15, and allow them instead to take a different, more prosaic, vocational qualification, in conjunction with Mathematics and a rudimentary form of English.

Of course, the mire in which the education system currently finds itself, with artificially inflated grades deprived of any academic credibility, and a proliferation of "soft" subjects and vocation subjects diminishing the worth of more "academic" options, could have been avoided largely had Barbara castle not deprived us of most of our Grammar Schools. The disparity between the quality of education offered in Northern Ireland really is no coincidence.

I was diagnosed with severe stupidness as a child, but that didn't stop me. I seeked as many aids as possible to help me with my writing. Thanks to them, I now have a highly successful career at the chicken factory, where I'm earning over $7,000 a year!!! I am clearly not a waste of humanity. I shall give aids to my kids, they need to receive the same help I received.

An education system in which the focus is on the lowest common denominator and ensuring mediocrity for all is unlikely to captivate or enthuse an able but socially awkward student, or one not totally self-motivated.
Special needs kids can get extra help without them being "the focus" of the education system. Moreover, helping kids with problems ranging from dyslexia to severe learning disabilities does not "ensur[e] mediocrity for all". I was taught to a very high standard in the same classes as those who needed helpers or extra tuition, often at a level higher than they would ever be taught.

What occurs to me is that there isn't a clear cut-off point for your argument. There's certainly a debate to be had about whether severely mentally or physically disabled kids should be mainstreamed or taught in specialist schools, but your argument would seem to object to folks with dyslexia or other 'minor' learning disabilities.

Furthermore, it would seem to disadvantage students like myself, who needed extra help in only certain classes. My mathematical skills are not the best, and I needed a little extra help from the teacher in my maths class. A close friend had, to the contrary, prodigious mathematical skills, and the teacher also helped him out by pushing him further with harder material.

Kids aren't a constant, as I'm sure you know. Teachers, or the support staff who help them, should be responsive to needs.

I highly doubt that these people can in no way contribute to society. Furthermore we shouldn't slash their budget they just need to be somewhere where they do not distract those who wish to focus on their education. We don't even need seperate schools just use seperate parts of the buildings.

I highly doubt that these people can in no way contribute to society. Furthermore we shouldn't slash their budget they just need to be somewhere where they do not distract those who wish to focus on their education. We don't even need seperate schools just use seperate parts of the buildings.

This is my view as well, and its always been the case at the schools Ive been to...

In theory, it could work; in practice, it could easily take more funding and time, especially if a student under disability seems likely to function adequately in an inclusion environment but in reality proves to be difficult. Would educators have enough patience for this kind of practice when they're over-burdened with large-size classes?
Ah, class size! There's a different kettle of fish, altogether! I knew, when in school 35 years ago, that small classes (10 max) were better for the students. But that's not who school is for, after all, now is it?

Ah, class size! There's a different kettle of fish, altogether! I knew, when in school 35 years ago, that small classes (10 max) were better for the students. But that's not who school is for, after all, now is it?

I remember first 15-20 when I was in grade 1. By the end of OAC (grade 13), there were 40. Practically sitting on top of each other during class. Not comfortable.

And of course, I come to a sudden realization: this Autistic kid will not contribute to society.

ROFL, I would have thought that for a kid who has a brother with Aspergers would actually have some realisation on what some of these kids actually have to put up with and also how much intelligence some of these kids actually have but can't quite use it as well as someone without these problems hence why they need extra attention so as to be able to contribute to society.

And do you really think the becoming an engineer means that you are neccesarliy going to be contributing to society?

Do you think that people who may not work in a profession does not contribute to society?

Despite the general rant-ish nature of the OP, I do see his point, and immensely sympathise. Maybe because when I was in grade 8, I was attacked by a "special ed" student. I was pushed onto iced pavement. The kid didn't even get told that his actions were wrong. I wound up in the VP's office. I was innocent. I was in tears and my head hurt like a bitch. Next thing I knew, I was told I had to go help out in the special ed class so I could see that they needed help more than discipline. I was given detention and wasted several English classes there. Just because I doing an independent project as opposed to the assigned novel. To this day, I still resent all the money spent on these types of students, and the lack of money in comparison spent on the general student population; on the average student who may or may not be the next greatest inventory but will have a lot to offer at the end of the day.

I think you have your anger directed at the wrong people Kyro. You really should be directing your anger at the staff and the poor way they handled the situation.

You are in Jr. high. This means that you are in 7th or 8th grade...meaning you are under the age of 16 and therefore very likely don't pay taxes. It isn't your money.

So the US doesn't have sales tax? Or a GST?

I don't tend to treat bigots very well and you have managed to show yourself to be one.

I know you are new here and don't know the posters all that well but you need to head down to the store and buy a sarcasmmetre

In exchange, you can have the 14 year old pregnant girl who used to stare at my ass while I was correcting another students paper. Or the 15 year old boy who asked me if I ever thought about kissing 15 year old boys.

lol, face it Sark you're to good looking to be a high school teacher. Drop down to early primary then all you have to worry about is the single parents. :tongue:

I think you have your anger directed at the wrong people Kyro. You really should be directing your anger at the staff and the poor way they handled the situation.

You don't think I gave the vice principal and earful? Oh, I'll be honest, that was the first and last time I ever had the right to just offload every profanity known to man. It was in that office I learned the joys of "fuck" as an expression of anger. Only time I ever swore without having to worry about my parents being called.

I was rightfully pissed with the school, but particularly that department because the supervising educator for that department only made excuses. I never got a bloody apology. I will admit, I did get one from the VP, not from the supervisor, nor from the kid in some kind of mandatory and forced fashion.

You don't think I gave the vice principal and earful? Oh, I'll be honest, that was the first and last time I ever had the right to just offload every profanity known to man. It was in that office I learned the joys of "fuck" as an expression of anger. Only time I ever swore without having to worry about my parents being called.

I was rightfully pissed with the school, but particularly that department because the supervising educator for that department only made excuses. I never got a bloody apology. I will admit, I did get one from the VP, not from the supervisor, nor from the kid in some kind of mandatory and forced fashion.

Yes ok but when you say you resent the money spent on these kids because of this incident it shows that you are directing anger towards the wrong people.

Yes ok but when you say you resent the money spent on these kids because of this incident it shows that you are directing anger towards the wrong people.

Money spent on 'supervision' that never ended up worked. Thus, money squandered. It is wasted when no good comes out of it.

So the US doesn't have sales tax? Or a GST?

We don't have a GST or any other kind of VAT. As for sales tax...well...if you're not the one earning the money, and instead are just given the money, it can hardly be said that you are the one paying the sales tax.

The one paying the tax is really the one who earned the money being spent.

Someone once said something about a society and how it treats its worst off? I forget.

I was diagnosed with severe stupidness as a child, but that didn't stop me. I seeked as many aids as possible to help me with my writing. Thanks to them, I now have a highly successful career at the chicken factory, where I'm earning over $7,000 a year!!! I am clearly not a waste of humanity. I shall give aids to my kids, they need to receive the same help I received.
That would explain so much.

Someone once said something about a society and how it treats its worst off? I forget.

He was probably one of those worst off, so, obviously he was just a drain on humanity, ;)

Someone once said something about a society and how it treats its worst off? I forget.

Because offering a subjective quoute from an equally subjective source is an excellent rebuttal of an objective theory?

Because offering a subjective quoute from an equally subjective source is an excellent rebuttal of an objective theory?

How is claiming that Special Needs children are a drain on society in anyway an objective theory?

How is claiming that Special Needs children are a drain on society in anyway an objective theory?

It is, if expressed in purely economic terms.

It is, if expressed in purely economic terms.

Economic maximisation is a subjective ideal to focus on.

It is, if expressed in purely economic terms.

Youre going to have to show me a source for that...

Something like 20% of the students at my high school were in Special Education of some sort while I was enrolled. I remember wondering how that was possible, and suspecting that there was something rotten about it given that, yes, large sums of money are involved in the planning and implementation of "special needs" programs. It's the large number of probably-normal students that's the scandal, rather than the amount of money spent on those with legitimate needs.

My personal opinion is cut the deadwood. The Spartans had it right, if the kid is touched in the head or deformed in body chuck them on the compost heap and let nature take its course. This is the problem with living in a affluent society, we can afford to take care genetic failures. Look at Sarah Palin's brood. My god why? I was in a class with a woman with 3-4 special needs children and my main question was why the hell did she keep pumping out the little debt monkeys. There should be a point when someone slaps these stupid parents upside the head. I don't see why we allow wasted potential to suck on the teat of the public like they have some right to life. They don't, at least not here in America, they only have the right to the pursuit of happiness, but not on my dime.

My personal opinion is cut the deadwood. The Spartans had it right, if the kid is touched in the head or deformed in body chuck them on the compost heap and let nature take its course. This is the problem with living in a affluent society, we can afford to take care genetic failures. Look at Sarah Palin's brood. My god why? I was in a class with a woman with 3-4 special needs children and my main question was why the hell did she keep pumping out the little debt monkeys. There should be a point when someone slaps these stupid parents upside the head. I don't see why we allow wasted potential to suck on the teat of the public like they have some right to life. They don't, at least not here in America, they only have the right to the pursuit of happiness, but not on my dime.

It's more religious lunacy than affluence that keeps people from aborting seriously damaged babies. Still, the abortion rate is something over 90% for Down Syndrome-afflicted babies. So I don't think we're vacuum-shy as a culture, for good or ill.

We don't have a GST or any other kind of VAT. As for sales tax...well...if you're not the one earning the money, and instead are just given the money, it can hardly be said that you are the one paying the sales tax.

The one paying the tax is really the one who earned the money being spent.

Well actually if you are buying it then yes you are the one paying the tax. You also assume Neo, that all the money he has spent is one that was simply given rather than earned.

Money spent on 'supervision' that never ended up worked. Thus, money squandered. It is wasted when no good comes out of it.

True but is reason to hate the special needs kids rather than the people who didn't use the money properly? Once again this is the staff's fault.

My personal opinion is cut the deadwood. The Spartans had it right, if the kid is touched in the head or deformed in body chuck them on the compost heap and let nature take its course. This is the problem with living in a affluent society, we can afford to take care genetic failures. Look at Sarah Palin's brood. My god why? I was in a class with a woman with 3-4 special needs children and my main question was why the hell did she keep pumping out the little debt monkeys. There should be a point when someone slaps these stupid parents upside the head. I don't see why we allow wasted potential to suck on the teat of the public like they have some right to life. They don't, at least not here in America, they only have the right to the pursuit of happiness, but not on my dime.

;) You bet your boots we had it right, and damnit, we will always be right, because might makes right! Hooyah! *suddenly feels very ashamed of her behaviour*

Now on a serious note... I have to wonder, where should the line be drawn because in theory under IDEA, no one child can be deprived of an education, no matter what their mental cognitive level is, no matter how cognitively deficient they are; a child that can't even recognise his/her own parents and IDEA would still qualify to be taught even though those resources would not make a difference. Should there come a point where we say that special needs has a line drawn somewhere because there are those with disabilities but can still flourish once they have the tools, and that those who will forever retain the cognitive abilities of an infant never go beyond that point?

True but is reason to hate the special needs kids rather than the people who didn't use the money properly? Once again this is the staff's fault.

But the staff didn't physically assault me, the kid did.

Oh and I will admit the resentment grew when I had to give up my time to "work" in the classroom where the same brat gets "educated". To know that they are given newer materials to work with while we get recycled junk that's falling apart and has someone else's obscene drawing in it.

Now on a serious note... I have to wonder, where should the line be drawn because in theory under IDEA, no one child can be deprived of an education, no matter what their mental cognitive level is, no matter how cognitively deficient they are; a child that can't even recognise his/her own parents and IDEA would still qualify to be taught even though those resources would not make a difference. Should there come a point where we say that special needs has a line drawn somewhere because there are those with disabilities but can still flourish once they have the tools, and that those who will forever retain the cognitive abilities of an infant never go beyond that point?
Where do you draw that line? And for what reason?

Oh and I will admit the resentment grew when I had to give up my time to "work" in the classroom where the same brat gets "educated". Then to see them get newer materials while the rest of us get old text books that are falling to pieces...
And of course you would happen to know the condition of the materials that got replaced and when, right?

Textbooks and other materials are usually on cycles, which is why sometimes you see classes with newer books than others, mainly because the budget happened to align that year at the end of one life cycle for textbook x in class y and didn't for textbook z in class a.

Personally, I think a lot of us are missing the point here. I don't think the OP was about cutting all he special-ed kids loose- it was just suggesting that we give "gifted" kids a higher priority. That, I'll agree with.

Yes, special-ed kids deserve the care they get. I fail to see, however, how gifted kids, and kids who are willing to work hard to get As, don't have special needs as well. Funding towards gifted programs will certainly pay off down the road, whereas special-ed funding, while necessary, will not.

Funding towards gifted programs will certainly pay off down the road, whereas special-ed funding, while necessary, will not.
You evidently didn't read the thread as there have been multiple stories showing just how special ed funding does indeed pay off.

But let me just ask you to prove it.

You evidently didn't read the thread as there have been multiple stories showing just how special ed funding does indeed pay off.

But let me just ask you to prove it.

And a few stories that how that programs for gifted students won't certainly pay off and if there isn't I could bring out one myself.

But the staff didn't physically assault me, the kid did.

Oh and I will admit the resentment grew when I had to give up my time to "work" in the classroom where the same brat gets "educated". To know that they are given newer materials to work with while we get recycled junk that's falling apart and has someone else's obscene drawing in it.

Which I am not saying is right but the staff failed to punish the kid correctly and instead punished you. But then again because one kid hit you and the staff failed to deal with it correctly does that mean all special ed classes should be stopped?

I know what you mean as a student I too had something similar happen to me and I held resentment towards this class and also the staff but having gotten older and knowing what some of the kids have to put up with the resentment towards the kids did go but the resentment towards how this school handled these kids and what they did.

The thing is that if you are gifted you shouldn't need a special class. Just go to the library in your spare time and read if you are desparate for enrichement. Me and my boyfriend looked through calc. text books a few times just for a way to spend the afternoon, and I used to work ahead in math class then ask questions that went into the lesson more deeply as the other students worked on their newest assign.

The thing is that if you are gifted you shouldn't need a special class.

research and personal experience say otherwise

research and personal experience say otherwise

I don't believe so because to be a life-long learner the motivation to look around and learn something has to come from you and not the prompting of a teacher.

I don't believe so because to be a life-long learner the motivation to look around and learn something has to come from you and not the prompting of a teacher.
"Motivation" is not at all the same thing as "gifted." As I discussed at length earlier in this thread, there are many kinds of gifted individuals, and not all of them have the gifts of social aptitude and self-motivation that would enable them to fulfill their potential without "special" help.

I don't believe so because to be a life-long learner the motivation to look around and learn something has to come from you and not the prompting of a teacher.

this seems to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what gifted kids are. its ok, most people don't get them. but without special interventions, large chunks of gifted kids not only fail to live up to anything like their potential, but actively sabotage themselves.

Because it's a waste of time? Educational provision for the mentally handicapped could be happpily cut, and, frankly, the funds would be better used to cultivate the minds of those with a greater chance of making something of themselves.

Trying to appeal to any sense of humanity in you would be pointless, and insulting you would be flaming at worse and flame bait at best. So instead, I am going to give you the same advice that I gave the OP, do volunteer work in the special ed program, and then get back to me.

Special needs people are worth less than the bullet it would take to kill them.

My honest opinion.

Please never buy a gun, not even a water gun.

I was diagnosed with severe stupidness as a child, but that didn't stop me. I seeked as many aids as possible to help me with my writing. Thanks to them, I now have a highly successful career at the chicken factory, where I'm earning over $7,000 a year!!! I am clearly not a waste of humanity. I shall give aids to my kids, they need to receive the same help I received.

In one instance I know this is probably sarcasm, but in another, this would explain that religion thread that I barely remember from last night.

My personal opinion is cut the deadwood. The Spartans had it right, if the kid is touched in the head or deformed in body chuck them on the compost heap and let nature take its course. This is the problem with living in a affluent society, we can afford to take care genetic failures. Look at Sarah Palin's brood. My god why? I was in a class with a woman with 3-4 special needs children and my main question was why the hell did she keep pumping out the little debt monkeys. There should be a point when someone slaps these stupid parents upside the head. I don't see why we allow wasted potential to suck on the teat of the public like they have some right to life. They don't, at least not here in America, they only have the right to the pursuit of happiness, but not on my dime.

Didn't the Deceleration of Independence say that we do have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Just throwing it out there.

Here's something frightening...

The 'No Child Left Behind' Act, which requires schools to adopt teaching methods supported by rigorous data analysis, is causing teachers to spend up to 45% of class time training kids to pass standardised tests. Super crunching is even shifting some teachers towards class lessons where every word is scripted and statistically vetted - Super Crunchers, Ian Ayres

What conclusion have we drawn to create these data sets, ultimately that school is a program to succeed at school.

I bang on about this but the issues with special needs children is merely part of an entire system that looks to measure children according to standards that have no real meaning outside of school.

Your upbringing has far more influence on your future outside of school than grades do.

Here's something frightening...



What conclusion have we drawn to create these data sets, ultimately that school is a program to succeed at school.

I bang on about this but the issues with special needs children is merely part of an entire system that looks to measure children according to standards that have no real meaning outside of school.

Your upbringing has far more influence on your future outside of school than grades do.

True dat...Its also very inefficient at getting the funds to the schools that need them, if your funding is based on how high your score is, only the 'successful' schools will get the funds they need, and the supposedly 'failing' schools, would get none, and perpetuate their 'failing' status...

Autistic kids don't contribute to society? Ever heard of Temple Grandin?

Man, you are full of yourself. You need to get down off your high horse because you know that great brain you're gifted with that you could be using a lot better than you are right now? Yeah, that one. You could suffer a head injury tomorrow and have it not work so hot after that, even if you *try* to make it work, and then where will you be?

Hopefully, in the hands of people who have a lot more sympathy for you than you do for kids less fortunate than you are. And hate to break it to you, but having an Aspie brother doesn't give you bonus arrogance points.

More seriously now (although yeah, I find you annoying), although we tend to label autistic people as "retarded," the fact is we don't really know what's going on in there. What makes them autistic, primarily, as I understand the condition is that they can't interact normally with the world around them. That doesn't mean something isn't getting through, it just means they can't make it obvious that they're learning anything.

And there are autistic people who grow up to contribute--Grandin's only one of them. They become scientists and computer geeks. They write books. They become artists. But they can't do any of that stuff if they're locked away in an institution so you don't have to feel put out that they're getting the same access to an education that you are. Any more than you could ever become an engineer if your mom had locked you in a closet your entire life. If you don't want it done to you, don't wish it on others.

I'd say "thanks for understanding," but I suspect you won't. High IQ, indeed.

I'll edit to add that I've been in gifted class. Big deal. All it is is a way to make the "normal" kids feel bad that someone is smarter than they are. I'd say offhand that the kind of education I got in those classes was the kind everyone should have been getting, but the powers that be decided to treat them all like dummies instead. Why not? It makes better consumers and worse citizens in the end, which is what they want anyway.

On the other hand, special ed class is about helping those kids who can be helped with it, to learn as many educational basics as they're able to learn and also how to take care of themselves and look for work if they're able to do that. But mostly it is a respite program so their poor parents can catch a break once in a while. Taking care of NORMAL children is incredibly hard work if you do it right, much less a child with special needs who needs round-the-clock care. And because as with Sparta we used to leave disabled children to the wolves rather than raise them, we don't have a lot of cultural experience with them and we kind of need help from those who have troubled to study the issue. Doesn't mean they always get it right, just means the parents get a break. It's not their faults the kids didn't turn out. Most of those problems that land kids in special ed are completely random, including autism.

Or, they *think* autism is. Be careful, though--if you're straight, be sure to marry a bimbo. I've heard rumors that they've linked autism in some cases with two highly intelligent people marrying and spawning. *shrug*

Our education system in general is made of epic fail, especially college. Requiring people to take "general" courses that have jack shit to do with their degree is just fucking retarded.

Our education system in general is made of epic fail, especially college. Requiring people to take "general" courses that have jack shit to do with their degree is just fucking retarded.

Agreed. Also, religious classes shouldn't be required in getting your degree unless your degree is about theology. My religious classes was taught by a "Non-Denomination" preacher. I had him for two classes. He basically treated the class as his own church, preaching and giving sermons.

I now believe that non-denomination is just Southern Baptist who don't want the stigmatization that comes with being a Southern Baptist.

Our education system in general is made of epic fail, especially college. Requiring people to take "general" courses that have jack shit to do with their degree is just fucking retarded.
It's called a well rounded education. It's also amazing just how often information in my non-major coursework has proven to be useful.

Agreed. Also, religious classes shouldn't be required in getting your degree unless your degree is about theology. My religious classes was taught by a "Non-Denomination" preacher. I had him for two classes. He basically treated the class as his own church, preaching and giving sermons.

I now believe that non-denomination is just Southern Baptist who don't want the stigmatization that comes with being a Southern Baptist.

Wait, you had to take religious classes? As in, they offered religious classes?

And I didnt think we could be beat in the religious area, lol...

It's called a well rounded education. It's also amazing just how often information in my non-major coursework has proven to be useful.

and it's a great way for college to sucker you into pay for 2 extra years. Without "General Ed" you could have a Bachelors in Two years, a Master in 4, and a Doctorate in 6.

Wait, you had to take religious classes? As in, they offered religious classes?

And I didnt think we could be beat in the religious area, lol...

Yea, in order for me to get my BA, I had to take two class on religion. Both of them were taught by the same idiot, both of them were just him spouting off about the ebils of Gays, Pagans, Catholics, and Mormons.

Needless to say after I got my two As (because he was easy enough to please, you just have to write papers that appeal to his obvious slant) I reported him to the dean.

It's called a well rounded education. It's also amazing just how often information in my non-major coursework has proven to be useful.

It's called "useless." Why the fuck does a historian need to learn algebra, or why does a mathematician need to take college English?

Basically what "well rounded education" does is completely and royally fuck over any person with a learning disability whatsoever.

Bad at math? Can't learn algebra even if your life depends on it? Well, you're screwed, forever unable to get a decent job, and confined to a life of poverty. All because you can't learn something you'll never even need to learn in the first place.

and it's a great way for college to sucker you into pay for 2 extra years. Without "General Ed" you could have a Bachelors in Two years, a Master in 4, and a Doctorate in 6.
Given that over the course of my MS I had a whole TWO non-interest slots and there's no such animal in a PhD program, I find your numbers a bit hard to swallow.

and it's a great way for college to sucker you into pay for 2 extra years. Without "General Ed" you could have a Bachelors in Two years, a Master in 4, and a Doctorate in 6.

and you wouldn't know shit for it.

and you wouldn't know shit for it.

Yea, because I really use what I learned (or didn't learn, depends on how you look at it) from my two religion classes.

Our education system in general is made of epic fail, especially college. Requiring people to take "general" courses that have jack shit to do with their degree is just fucking retarded.

if you don't want a college education, there are perfectly good apprenticeships available

and you wouldn't know shit for it.

But you'd know what you need to know.

It's called "useless." Why the fuck does a historian need to learn algebra, or why does a mathematician need to take college English?
Given that math is a fundamental for survival and while spitting out equations is nice, mathematicians STILL need to know how to write scholastic papers that are READABLE...

I'd say both are very important to the other.

Basically what "well rounded education" does is completely and royally fuck over any person with a learning disability whatsoever.

Bad at math? Can't learn algebra even if your life depends on it? Well, you're screwed, forever unable to get a decent job, and confined to a life of poverty. All because you can't learn something you'll never even need to learn in the first place.
I admit that teachers aren't excatly highly paid, but I'm fairly confident I have a decent job even though I *gasp!* had to take a math course my freshman year! And yes, I do have a math LD, I used university resources for help, the same as I did in public schooling.

if you don't want a college education, there are perfectly good apprenticeships available

I do (or rather, did) want one, but it's kind of hard to get one (or impossible) if you're:

A) A complete moron
or
B) A complete moron in certain areas

I fall under "B." When I was in college (I never finished), I got A's and B's in every course except math.

Just for that, I'm effectively fucked.

I did have to take my math classes twice. I also learned to never take math in the Summer, where the classes are in 5 weeks instead of the usual length.

Yea, because I really use what I learned (or didn't learn, depends on how you look at it) from my two religion classes.
Your general ed course work was JUST those religious classes? No History? English? Math? Sciences? Haven't used ANYTHING you've learned from them? Never?

I am mightily tempted to make a crack about your posts here in various threads in that case.

Given that math is a fundamental for survival and while spitting out equations is nice, mathematicians STILL need to know how to write scholastic papers that are READABLE...

I'd say both are very important to the other.


I admit that teachers aren't excatly highly paid, but I'm fairly confident I have a decent job even though I *gasp!* had to take a math course my freshman year! And yes, I do have a math LD, I used university resources for help, the same as I did in public schooling.

Ah, but you're not a moron, so you were actually able to get a degree. If you were a moron, it might be a different case, but you're not.

Ah, but you're not a moron, so you were actually able to get a degree. If you were a moron, it might be a different case, but you're not.
In math? Oh I'm bad enough. Didn't you try to use your university's resources for help? If MY university had a math center and a resouce center for LD students, I'm pretty sure your's must have as well.

Your general ed course work was JUST those religious classes? No History? English? Math? Sciences? Haven't used ANYTHING you've learned from them? Never?

I am mightily tempted to make a crack about your posts here in various threads in that case.

My degree was in History, I use English day to day, but I've learned most of what I've know about English in High School. Although to be fair Detective Fiction was one of my English class, and it did start my love of detective fiction. I know fuck-all about science that is outside of Mythbusters and from what I've learned about the human body in my medical classes.

I will correct one part of my previous statement on this thread though, General ed classes do give you a chance to find out what you excel at and what you have a greater chance at getting a degree in. My highest grade during the General ed part of the program was History, hence my BA in well History. The science part did lay the foundation in my medical classes. What with the atoms being the building block of our human body....or was that cells...

In math? Oh I'm bad enough. Didn't you try to use your university's resources for help? If MY university had a math center and a resouce center for LD students, I'm pretty sure your's must have as well.

Mine did, but trying to help me with math is like trying to help the sun freeze over: It's completely impossible. Do you own any pets? I'm sure they are better at math than I am.

trying to help the sun freeze over

hmm...I think anything is possible if we put our minds to it, :p

hmm...I think anything is possible if we put our minds to it, :p

Depends on what we put our minds to.

hmm...I think anything is possible if we put our minds to it, :p

Thank you, Dr. Brown. ;)

Except for teaching me math, that is.

actually what's wrong with educational priorities, that's just completely backwards as to any kind of usefulness, is this political nonsense the emphasis perpetuating everything that's wrong with the dominant culture at the expense of letting kids explore and enjoy learning things that are actually useful, like arts, sciences and technology. and manditory p.e.? give me an effing break!

education is between teachers and students. if you want to see quality of education increase a hundred fold, get administrators and parents to butt the hell out.

actually what's wrong with educational priorities, that's just completely backwards as to any kind of usefulness, is this political nonsense the emphasis perpetuating everything that's wrong with the dominant culture at the expense of letting kids explore and enjoy learning things that are actually useful, like arts, sciences and technology. and manditory p.e.? give me an effing break!

education is between teachers and students. if you want to see quality of education increase a hundred fold, get administrators and parents to butt the hell out.

I hated PE in school. It was only after, in my twenties, that I realised how relaxing exercise can be. I'm not a sports fan, I dislike competitive sports. The one time we were allowed into the school gym, I loved it. I think more people would enjoy PE (particularly those who dislike the dog-eat-dog aspect of it) if it was restricted to gym machines, free weights, and sport as an elective.

I hated PE in school. It was only after, in my twenties, that I realised how relaxing exercise can be. I'm not a sports fan, I dislike competitive sports. The one time we were allowed into the school gym, I loved it. I think more people would enjoy PE (particularly those who dislike the dog-eat-dog aspect of it) if it was restricted to gym machines, free weights, and sport as an elective.
i think the main thing, it needs to be an elective, not a required subject and not be graded like it was a class where you were actually learning anything.

in larger schools that could have multiple classes and options. qui gong/tai chai would be a good to have as one of the available options. i would have loved it if there had been something like that in mine.

i think the main thing, it needs to be an elective, not a required subject and not be graded like it was a class where you were actually learning anything.

in larger schools that could have multiple classes and options. qui gong/tai chai would be a good to have as one of the available options. i would have loved it if there had been something like that in mine.

It shouldn't be entirely an elective. The fatties must be made to not be fatties, by force.

It shouldn't be entirely an elective. The fatties must be made to not be fatties, by force.

What if required PE and extracurricular Football fail to do so?



Not that Im a case in point of that or anything...........lol

What if required PE and extracurricular Football fail to do so?



Not that Im a case in point of that or anything...........lol

Admittedly, I've not thought that far ahead. Biology lessons incorporating liposuction as part of the course?

i think the main thing, it needs to be an elective, not a required subject and not be graded like it was a class where you were actually learning anything.

Are you saying you can't learn anything in PE?

It shouldn't be entirely an elective. The fatties must be made to not be fatties, by force.

The fuck is your problem?

Our education system in general is made of epic fail, especially college. Requiring people to take "general" courses that have jack shit to do with their degree is just fucking retarded.
If only colleges made their requirements available to potential applicants, so that said applicants could decide ahead of time if they wanted to follow that course of study...

Hey, maybe we could even invent a name for schools that require general course work in a variety of subjects. Something like, say, "Liberal Arts." That would be so handy, wouldn't it?

If only colleges made their requirements available to potential applicants, so that said applicants could decide ahead of time if they wanted to follow that course of study...

Hey, maybe we could even invent a name for schools that require general course work in a variety of subjects. Something like, say, "Liberal Arts." That would be so handy, wouldn't it?

First of all, what is your problem? There's no need to act like a dick all the time.

Second, all colleges in the state have the same requirement. I did "decide ahead of time."

First of all, what is your problem? There's no need to act like a dick all the time.

Humor: You Might Just Encounter It On The Interwebs.


Second, all colleges in the state have the same requirement. I did "decide ahead of time."
If you live in the USA, then I don't even need to ask what state you live in, because that's simply not true.

It sucks if you didn't find a school that was the right fit for you. Sometimes that happens. Just don't waste time trying to blame "college" for the fact that you went to the wrong school, or the fact that Ancient Cultures is a C- blot on your record for the rest of eternity, or whatever other bug is up your butt. It's four years of your life, it's not the end of the world, and in a decade or so you probably won't remember anything from your college days except the faces of the girls/guys who you never worked up the courage to hit on. That's how it goes for most folks.

Humor: You Might Just Encounter It On The Interwebs.

Epic failure (on my part). You just did encounter it. :p

(I apologize, I thought you were being condescending. My mistake.)

If you live in the USA, then I don't even need to ask what state you live in, because that's simply not true.

They all have a list of requirements in certain areas that must be met; they might differ somewhat in what classes you can take to satisfy those requirements, but they all have them.

It sucks if you didn't find a school that was the right fit for you. Sometimes that happens. Just don't waste time trying to blame "college" for the fact that you went to the wrong school, or the fact that Ancient Cultures is a C- blot on your record for the rest of eternity, or whatever other bug is up your butt. It's four years of your life, it's not the end of the world, and in a decade or so you probably won't remember anything from your college days except the faces of the girls/guys who you never worked up the courage to hit on. That's how it goes for most folks.

Yes, if you're a non-moron. I am not.

They all have a list of requirements in certain areas that must be met; they might differ somewhat in what classes you can take to satisfy those requirements, but they all have them.

Again, it's not true.

Yes, if you want to go to a LIBERAL ARTS college, then you're going to find a lot of very similar programs and requirements. But one of the most annoying attitudes in the USA right now is the attitude that everyone should go to a liberal arts college...that just ain't so.

There are technical schools that do a phenomenal job of providing specialized training in more narrow areas of study. There are vocational schools that will get even more specialized.

It's kind of a shame that right now all kids are expected to follow the same life path, from high school right into liberal arts college, and I certainly bought into that when I was deciding what to do after high school. So I'm not saying you're a moron for it, just that it's not the education system that is to blame; it's more a societal assumption that pressures people to ignore a lot of the options that exist.

Seriously though, it sucks if you didn't get what you wanted out of college. Particularly given the expense...my boyfriend came out of college with 40k in debt. Fuck that noise.

Again, it's not true.

Yes, if you want to go to a LIBERAL ARTS college, then you're going to find a lot of very similar programs and requirements. But one of the most annoying attitudes in the USA right now is the attitude that everyone should go to a liberal arts college...that just ain't so.

There are technical schools that do a phenomenal job of providing specialized training in more narrow areas of study. There are vocational schools that will get even more specialized.

It's kind of a shame that right now all kids are expected to follow the same life path, from high school right into liberal arts college, and I certainly bought into that when I was deciding what to do after high school. So I'm not saying you're a moron for it, just that it's not the education system that is to blame; it's more a societal assumption that pressures people to ignore a lot of the options that exist.

Seriously though, it sucks if you didn't get what you wanted out of college. Particularly given the expense...my boyfriend came out of college with 40k in debt. Fuck that noise.

I'll keep that in mind. Thanks! :fluffle: