Documents of Interest
Below are documents of interest from the administration, parents, FOIA requests, etc.
"Susan Safranski, the Director of Special Education is properly certified"
- Rob Lawrence, Birmingham School Board President
FACT
Actually, it was not an issue of “not being fully certified”…it was multiple issues:
1. A violation of R340.1772 and R340.1771 when Susan Safranski's one and only special education certification as a school psychologist expired on June 30, 1998.
2. August 1995: Susan was not enrolled in an approved university or college to study and obtain her special education administrator’s certificate for the first 6 years she was employed as the supervisor. This is a mandatory part of R340.1772 Supervisor of Special Education and R340.1771 Director of Special Education.
3. Not having the mandatory 12 semester hours towards her special education administrator’s certificate when she was promoted to Director of Special Education in August 2003 as required by R340.1771 Director of Special Education. All apply when a School District uses “any” portion of special education funds.
4. Birmingham did not fill-out or submit the Michigan Department of Education “Temporary and Continuing Temporary Application for a Supervisor or Director of Special Education” the entire 8 years that Susan Safranski was the supervisor and only 2 out of the 3 years that she had been the director. The only 2 applications filled-out; approved by Birmingham and Oakland Schools administrators were not honestly or accurately filled-out or submitted.
5. The MDE has renewed Susan’s expired school psychologist certificate with classes from her general and special education administrator’s program and are not even applicable to a school psychologist.
On January 2, 2007, Susan Safranski sent the memo below to select Special Ed staff
On December 12, 2006, the newly formed Parents For Positive Change, met with school administrators to discuss parent concerns. Below is the agenda for that meeting and what was brought up for discussion. A follow up meeting is scheduled for February 15, 2007 when the administration will address the points below.
December 12, 2006
MEETING WITH BIRMINGHAM ADMINISTRATION, SCHOOL BOARD AND PARENTS/GUARDIANS
What:
This meeting was requested by parents and guardians who have many concerns about the Birmingham Public Schools (BPS) Special Education Administration and how it is servicing children with special needs.
Who:
Mr. Rob Lawrence, President, Birmingham School Board
Dr. John Hoeffler, Superintendent, Birmingham Public Schools,
Ms. Susan Safranski, Director of Special Education, Birmingham Public Schools;
Parents for Positive Change - Parents/Guardians of children with special needs in Birmingham schools
When: December 12, 2006 - 8:30am
Where: Birmingham Administration Building
Agenda
Parent Opening
Parent Concerns
1. Communication
•
Special Ed administration does not consistently return phone calls, emails or written communication.
Special Ed administration does not consistently return phone calls, emails or written communication. •Transportation personnel do not consistently return phone calls. Children picked up late and miss instructional time. Lengthy travel time, often resulting in negative behaviors. Parents not informed of changes or problems (too frequent use of substitutes, bus schedule changes, late pick ups and drop offs, etc). Inconsistent resolution of issues such as lack of communication device on bus. See Attachment 1
Transportation personnel do not consistently return phone calls. Children picked up late and miss instructional time. Lengthy travel time, often resulting in negative behaviors. Parents not informed of changes or problems (too frequent use of substitutes, bus schedule changes, late pick ups and drop offs, etc). Inconsistent resolution of issues such as lack of communication device on bus. See Attachment 1•The transfer of 14.1% of Autistic Center Program funds into BPS General Fund, resulting in over $630,000.00 of revenue removed from the Autistic Center Program in 2006-2007 school year. Parents told money is for indirect costs - what does that mean? No response to clarification request under the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). See Attachment 2
The transfer of 14.1% of Autistic Center Program funds into BPS General Fund, resulting in over $630,000.00 of revenue removed from the Autistic Center Program in 2006-2007 school year. Parents told money is for indirect costs - what does that mean? No response to clarification request under the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). See Attachment 2 •Special Ed administrator not properly credentialed. Parents told this is not true, when in fact corrective actions are in place. Due to Statute of Limitations, said administrator only penalized for last 3 of 11 years of unlawful employment by BPS. Parents are asking what the fiscal implications are to the district involving the 2003-2004, 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school years. Parents are asking and not receiving a response. Attachment 3 A, B and C
Special Ed administrator not properly credentialed. Parents told this is not true, when in fact corrective actions are in place. Due to Statute of Limitations, said administrator only penalized for last 3 of 11 years of unlawful employment by BPS. Parents are asking what the fiscal implications are to the district involving the 2003-2004, 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school years. Parents are asking and not receiving a response. Attachment 3 A, B and C•Meetings with parents held infrequently with no meeting minutes, followup or plan of action. Attachment 4
Meetings with parents held infrequently with no meeting minutes, followup or plan of action. Attachment 4•MiAccess, Vocational and other testing results not given to parents in a timely manner. Parents forced to call, email and request a FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) just to receive information.
MiAccess, Vocational and other testing results not given to parents in a timely manner. Parents forced to call, email and request a FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) just to receive information.•Some administrators not consistent about visiting Special Ed programs on a regular basis; often not for years at a time.
Some administrators not consistent about visiting Special Ed programs on a regular basis; often not for years at a time. •Program for child changed without parents being notified. Child receiving academics in elementary LRC (Learning Resource Center) and then forced to go into General Ed without proper training or instructional support.
Program for child changed without parents being notified. Child receiving academics in elementary LRC (Learning Resource Center) and then forced to go into General Ed without proper training or instructional support. •Parents asked to schedule communication with classroom teacher only via email, which can be difficult or very unreliable. Attachment 5
Parents asked to schedule communication with classroom teacher only via email, which can be difficult or very unreliable. Attachment 5 •Parents not informed of alternative programming available to their student, ie Jardon for high school.
Parents not informed of alternative programming available to their student, ie Jardon for high school. •The Board of Ed decided to use the Inclusive Model in Birmingham Schools - are there any special education experts on the Board who are qualified to determine that this is in the best interest of our children?
The Board of Ed decided to use the Inclusive Model in Birmingham Schools - are there any special education experts on the Board who are qualified to determine that this is in the best interest of our children?•Administrators do not communicate on a timely basis, changes in classes that affect secondary Special Ed students, such as Art, Music, Home Economics, etc. Attachment 6
Administrators do not communicate on a timely basis, changes in classes that affect secondary Special Ed students, such as Art, Music, Home Economics, etc. Attachment 6•Poor planning for legislative changes on the part of the administration that will affect students receiving Special Education services. Example: No Child Left Behind.
Poor planning for legislative changes on the part of the administration that will affect students receiving Special Education services. Example: No Child Left Behind.•Parents told to attend Friends of Different Learners in order to get Special Education information. Why do we have to join and pay for this information? Attachment 7
Parents told to attend Friends of Different Learners in order to get Special Education information. Why do we have to join and pay for this information? Attachment 7•Ineffective methods of communication between administrators and parents and therefore parents are often given an inaccurate picture of the current situation.
Ineffective methods of communication between administrators and parents and therefore parents are often given an inaccurate picture of the current situation. •Parents frequently told services cannot be provided due to budget constraints or lack of funds. Defined under IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) must be available to all students inclusively. District cannot use lack of funds as an excuse not to provide services.
Parents frequently told services cannot be provided due to budget constraints or lack of funds. Defined under IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) must be available to all students inclusively. District cannot use lack of funds as an excuse not to provide services.2.Individualized Education Plan (IEP)
Individualized Education Plan (IEP)•Non-compliance with IEPs: little or no implementation of evidence based research in IEPs and little or inappropriate modification of curriculum. Little or no tracking of progress or regression. Development of IEPs should not be based solely on observation but should incrementally track the student’s actual progress using measurable assessment tools. The majority of IEPs, under goals/objectives, read “still struggling”, or “will continue to work on”, etc. which doesn’t reflect how kids will achieve them. Teacher “observation” cannot be measured.
Non-compliance with IEPs: little or no implementation of evidence based research in IEPs and little or inappropriate modification of curriculum. Little or no tracking of progress or regression. Development of IEPs should not be based solely on observation but should incrementally track the student’s actual progress using measurable assessment tools. The majority of IEPs, under goals/objectives, read “still struggling”, or “will continue to work on”, etc. which doesn’t reflect how kids will achieve them. Teacher “observation” cannot be measured.•No specific written guidance or direction as to how to modify curriculum for Special Education students.
No specific written guidance or direction as to how to modify curriculum for Special Education students. •The administrators are forcing the parents to limit the number of goals in their IEP, rejecting subject-specific goals, ie. science, social studies, art, music, etc… even though there are no state or federal regulations which support this.
The administrators are forcing the parents to limit the number of goals in their IEP, rejecting subject-specific goals, ie. science, social studies, art, music, etc… even though there are no state or federal regulations which support this. •Goals are poorly written, with little or no criteria for measurement.
Goals are poorly written, with little or no criteria for measurement. •PLAAFPs (Present Level of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance) have little or no data to support students’ current functional level.
PLAAFPs (Present Level of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance) have little or no data to support students’ current functional level.•Functional behavior assessments and plans not written or implemented, allowing for a student to be dragged by ankles across carpet, sustaining numerous rug burns. See Attachment 8 A and B
Functional behavior assessments and plans not written or implemented, allowing for a student to be dragged by ankles across carpet, sustaining numerous rug burns. See Attachment 8 A and B•Students given MiAccess not being assessed in Science or Social Studies as required by Michigan Dept. of Ed. IEPs do not reflect method of assessment for those students in those areas.
Students given MiAccess not being assessed in Science or Social Studies as required by Michigan Dept. of Ed. IEPs do not reflect method of assessment for those students in those areas. •LRCs (Practical English, etc) not following IEPs. Parents being told such classes are curriculum driven; not directed by the IEP goals.
LRCs (Practical English, etc) not following IEPs. Parents being told such classes are curriculum driven; not directed by the IEP goals. •Parapros ordered to not communicate directly with parents. Parents must go through classroom teacher.
Parapros ordered to not communicate directly with parents. Parents must go through classroom teacher.•Parapros of elementary age students rotated frequently so students don’t become dependant. Children at this developmental age need safe, consistent relationships in order to promote security and success in school.
Parapros of elementary age students rotated frequently so students don’t become dependant. Children at this developmental age need safe, consistent relationships in order to promote security and success in school. •Parapros need to be valued and adequately trained so that their time spent with students is an integral part of the students’ learning environment. Currently, while many parapros are wonderful and effective, some are considered just kind babysitters.
Parapros need to be valued and adequately trained so that their time spent with students is an integral part of the students’ learning environment. Currently, while many parapros are wonderful and effective, some are considered just kind babysitters. •Lack of OT (Occupational Therapy) services ('consultation' vs one-on-one instruction); IEPs cannot by federal or state regulations simply document "consult” without clear indication in writing of what those consultation services will be and why. Often, “consult” is interpreted as no services at all.
Lack of OT (Occupational Therapy) services ('consultation' vs one-on-one instruction); IEPs cannot by federal or state regulations simply document "consult” without clear indication in writing of what those consultation services will be and why. Often, “consult” is interpreted as no services at all.•Lack of authentic and evidence-based behavior plans or social skills training and social skills groups.
Lack of authentic and evidence-based behavior plans or social skills training and social skills groups. •Lack of programs that best service children’s individual needs. Some children do not fit into any current program as they are too high functioning for one; too low functioning for others.
Lack of programs that best service children’s individual needs. Some children do not fit into any current program as they are too high functioning for one; too low functioning for others. •There are no EI (Emotionally Impaired) or LD (Learning Disabled) classrooms. All LD classes are being taught in Secondary Resource Rooms and primarily by teachers without LD certification. Often times, children aren’t progressing in their educational programs are and are essentially “treading water” at best.
There are no EI (Emotionally Impaired) or LD (Learning Disabled) classrooms. All LD classes are being taught in Secondary Resource Rooms and primarily by teachers without LD certification. Often times, children aren’t progressing in their educational programs are and are essentially “treading water” at best. •Lack of meaningful, educational benefit (mindless activities, ie. cutting out shapes in high school and excessive recreational video watching and computer game use). Attachment 9
Lack of meaningful, educational benefit (mindless activities, ie. cutting out shapes in high school and excessive recreational video watching and computer game use). Attachment 9•The reclassification of a student’s primary disability without an adequate explanation to the parents. Attachment 10
The reclassification of a student’s primary disability without an adequate explanation to the parents. Attachment 10•Development of Special Ed based health and sex education long overdue and is not being implemented district-wide.
Development of Special Ed based health and sex education long overdue and is not being implemented district-wide.•Micromanagement of detail by the administration which should be the responsibility of the classroom teacher. For example, teachers should be allowed to determine appropriate community based instruction which would align with the student’s IEP goals.
Micromanagement of detail by the administration which should be the responsibility of the classroom teacher. For example, teachers should be allowed to determine appropriate community based instruction which would align with the student’s IEP goals.•Assistive technology not being properly implemented or used. Lack of training to maximize student’s use of technology in classroom.
Assistive technology not being properly implemented or used. Lack of training to maximize student’s use of technology in classroom.•Transition Plans are poorly developed, written, implemented and tracked. Many are not being initiated early enough in children’s academic career.
Transition Plans are poorly developed, written, implemented and tracked. Many are not being initiated early enough in children’s academic career. •High school children in LRC English assigned inappropriate novels to read. When parent raised concerns, all novels were removed from class, essentially punishing all children. Until parent raised great concern at all levels, administration back-tracked. Attachment 11
High school children in LRC English assigned inappropriate novels to read. When parent raised concerns, all novels were removed from class, essentially punishing all children. Until parent raised great concern at all levels, administration back-tracked. Attachment 11 •General Ed teachers not reviewing IEPs on a consistent basis. General Ed teachers not following IEP modifications, accommodations, goals and objectives and even punishing students or grading them improperly. This may be due to inadequate training of General Ed teachers by the administration.
General Ed teachers not reviewing IEPs on a consistent basis. General Ed teachers not following IEP modifications, accommodations, goals and objectives and even punishing students or grading them improperly. This may be due to inadequate training of General Ed teachers by the administration. •Parent seeking 504 Plan for child misinformed by school psychologist and told “we don’t do 504 Plans at this school.” (504 Plans are the responsibility of the Office of Civil Rights)
Parent seeking 504 Plan for child misinformed by school psychologist and told “we don’t do 504 Plans at this school.” (504 Plans are the responsibility of the Office of Civil Rights)•Extended School Year Services (ESY) by law should not be based on disability but on need. Currently only the AI program offers ESY Services.
Extended School Year Services (ESY) by law should not be based on disability but on need. Currently only the AI program offers ESY Services. •Highly respected psychologist in private practice, who has published two books with Dr. Stanley Greenspan, was ostracized by a Special Ed administrator when intervening on a family’s behalf, assisting them with an IEP. Parent overheard Special Ed administrator berate the school social worker, who was told “never refer to Dr. X again.”
Highly respected psychologist in private practice, who has published two books with Dr. Stanley Greenspan, was ostracized by a Special Ed administrator when intervening on a family’s behalf, assisting them with an IEP. Parent overheard Special Ed administrator berate the school social worker, who was told “never refer to Dr. X again.”•Coordinators at IEP meetings do not consistently write in IEP services agreed upon by the team, stating “trust me, it doesn’t need to be written in. “ Staff uses excuse that there is no space remaining on the IEP to write these in.
Coordinators at IEP meetings do not consistently write in IEP services agreed upon by the team, stating “trust me, it doesn’t need to be written in. “ Staff uses excuse that there is no space remaining on the IEP to write these in.3.Inclusion Model
Inclusion Model•Repeated requests have failed to produce a written inclusive model.
Repeated requests have failed to produce a written inclusive model. •Vital self-contained classrooms being eliminated (Berkshire, etc) because of Birmingham’s all inclusive “inclusive model”.
Vital self-contained classrooms being eliminated (Berkshire, etc) because of Birmingham’s all inclusive “inclusive model”. •Setting low expectations and providing anything but meaningful educational benefits is contraindicated to the IEP process. The district’s Special Education Program budget is well funded .
Setting low expectations and providing anything but meaningful educational benefits is contraindicated to the IEP process. The district’s Special Education Program budget is well funded .•General Ed teachers and ancillary staff not properly trained to receive, educate and include Special Ed children in “inclusive model.” Parents and students and at times, both General and Special ed not prepared for the transition to the inclusive model.
General Ed teachers and ancillary staff not properly trained to receive, educate and include Special Ed children in “inclusive model.” Parents and students and at times, both General and Special ed not prepared for the transition to the inclusive model. •Troy Daze, Special Ed Prom and other outings rejected because of “inclusive model.” These opportunities teach important life skills and offer recreational outings that General Ed students enjoy, such as, Cedar Point. Attachment 12 A, B, C, D, E
Troy Daze, Special Ed Prom and other outings rejected because of “inclusive model.” These opportunities teach important life skills and offer recreational outings that General Ed students enjoy, such as, Cedar Point. Attachment 12 A, B, C, D, E•The Special Ed prom was supported by the Special Ed department for over 25 years but discontinued under the “inclusive model”, so parents and teachers saw the need to continue this event and have done so the last few years.
The Special Ed prom was supported by the Special Ed department for over 25 years but discontinued under the “inclusive model”, so parents and teachers saw the need to continue this event and have done so the last few years.•Elementary school students are prevented from attending week-long overnight camp with their General Ed peers, unless accompanied by a special ed trained adult which the district does not supply. Under IDEA, the district may supply appropriate supervision to Special Ed students.
Elementary school students are prevented from attending week-long overnight camp with their General Ed peers, unless accompanied by a special ed trained adult which the district does not supply. Under IDEA, the district may supply appropriate supervision to Special Ed students. •Are General Ed students denied opportunities for growth, socialization, independence and recreation if a Special Ed student is not in attendance?
Are General Ed students denied opportunities for growth, socialization, independence and recreation if a Special Ed student is not in attendance?•No formal after school programs for children with special needs. Parents expected to provide an aide for their child to participate in General Ed after school programs.
No formal after school programs for children with special needs. Parents expected to provide an aide for their child to participate in General Ed after school programs. •Children being isolated from peers and the teacher not intervening. Parent reports: “My daughter used to sit in a corner during gym, behind a door, alone, because she was forced into an environment where she was uncomfortable and couldn’t keep up.”
Children being isolated from peers and the teacher not intervening. Parent reports: “My daughter used to sit in a corner during gym, behind a door, alone, because she was forced into an environment where she was uncomfortable and couldn’t keep up.”•“My child hasn’t had a phone call from a General Ed child since she was in 3rd grade. She is presently in high school.”
“My child hasn’t had a phone call from a General Ed child since she was in 3rd grade. She is presently in high school.”•Vocational activities should include more valued tasks and less demeaning activities such as cleaning up after General Ed students in the cafeteria. Vocational activities should be based on the students’ interests.
Vocational activities should include more valued tasks and less demeaning activities such as cleaning up after General Ed students in the cafeteria. Vocational activities should be based on the students’ interests. 4.Autistic Center Program
Autistic Center Program•On what basis was the decision made to utilize administrators who have no AI credentials or endorsements to support the AI program? Attachment 13 A, B, C, D
On what basis was the decision made to utilize administrators who have no AI credentials or endorsements to support the AI program? Attachment 13 A, B, C, D•How are the percentages for payment calculated for the Special Ed administrators’ salaries? The allotment of funds should directly relate to the number of students serviced. How do you justify the current payment percentages for 95 AI center based students out of a total of 905 students receiving special education services? It is our understanding that one of the Special Ed administrators is responsible for only one center based AI classroom.
How are the percentages for payment calculated for the Special Ed administrators’ salaries? The allotment of funds should directly relate to the number of students serviced. How do you justify the current payment percentages for 95 AI center based students out of a total of 905 students receiving special education services? It is our understanding that one of the Special Ed administrators is responsible for only one center based AI classroom. •No accountable, dedicated administrator for AI program. There is no administrator qualified to address the unique needs of the student with autism.
No accountable, dedicated administrator for AI program. There is no administrator qualified to address the unique needs of the student with autism.•AI student at Seaholm taken away in handcuffs at administrator’s instructions. Parent begged to intervene and was told “there are important people whose children attend this school - your child needs to be institutionalized.“ Family is Korean and English is their second language and relies on one family member to translate. Administrator would not wait for said family member to arrive at school to intervene.
AI student at Seaholm taken away in handcuffs at administrator’s instructions. Parent begged to intervene and was told “there are important people whose children attend this school - your child needs to be institutionalized.“ Family is Korean and English is their second language and relies on one family member to translate. Administrator would not wait for said family member to arrive at school to intervene. •AI Center based program at Seaholm housed in basement; students segregated from their General Ed peers. How does this fit into the inclusive model?
AI Center based program at Seaholm housed in basement; students segregated from their General Ed peers. How does this fit into the inclusive model?•Art, Music, and Skills for Living not provided to AI Center students. Parents told that due to changes in the law, they could not offer the courses to the AI students. Michigan Law states needs of children must be met. The W. Bloomfield school district utilizes the services of the FAR Conservatory of the Performing Arts for their entire special education student population. Music, art and adapted physical education services are provided by FAR to the point that they are fully special education reimbursable to the district under the No Child Left Behind regulations and requirements.
Art, Music, and Skills for Living not provided to AI Center students. Parents told that due to changes in the law, they could not offer the courses to the AI students. Michigan Law states needs of children must be met. The W. Bloomfield school district utilizes the services of the FAR Conservatory of the Performing Arts for their entire special education student population. Music, art and adapted physical education services are provided by FAR to the point that they are fully special education reimbursable to the district under the No Child Left Behind regulations and requirements. •Historically, before 2006, the ESY program was 6 hours of instruction per day as opposed to the current 5 hour day. This reduction resulted in over 20 hours of lost instructional time, causing overall skill regression.
Historically, before 2006, the ESY program was 6 hours of instruction per day as opposed to the current 5 hour day. This reduction resulted in over 20 hours of lost instructional time, causing overall skill regression. •80% of 2006 ESY survey results were negative. Attachment 14
80% of 2006 ESY survey results were negative. Attachment 14 •Community Based Instruction and Field Trips denied unless General Ed student in attendance. Part of the definitions in the IDEA stress the importance of mobilizing school and community resources to enable the child to learn as effectively as possible in his/her educational program. Attachment 15 A and B
Community Based Instruction and Field Trips denied unless General Ed student in attendance. Part of the definitions in the IDEA stress the importance of mobilizing school and community resources to enable the child to learn as effectively as possible in his/her educational program. Attachment 15 A and B •Definition of Community Based Instruction (CBI) is attached. Attachment 16
Definition of Community Based Instruction (CBI) is attached. Attachment 16 •Lack of speech/language services (60 minutes/week) is not sufficient for children with Autism and goes against all evidence-based research using programs like ABA (Applied Behavioral Analysis) and DIR (Developmental, Individual Difference, Relationship). Both of these programs are recognized by the United States Department of Education. Attachment 17
Lack of speech/language services (60 minutes/week) is not sufficient for children with Autism and goes against all evidence-based research using programs like ABA (Applied Behavioral Analysis) and DIR (Developmental, Individual Difference, Relationship). Both of these programs are recognized by the United States Department of Education. Attachment 17•Teacher budgets cut in half for 2006/07 school year with no advance notice. Why are teachers responsible for paying for essential materials out of pocket?
Teacher budgets cut in half for 2006/07 school year with no advance notice. Why are teachers responsible for paying for essential materials out of pocket?•Why are teachers told to implement and are being evaluated on the implementation of START (Statewide Autism Resources and Training), when very few AI teachers have attended the training? Who makes the decision as to who gets to attend the START training?
Why are teachers told to implement and are being evaluated on the implementation of START (Statewide Autism Resources and Training), when very few AI teachers have attended the training? Who makes the decision as to who gets to attend the START training? •How safe is the “Time Out” room in the AI Program at Seaholm?
How safe is the “Time Out” room in the AI Program at Seaholm?•What is the status on staff training regarding restraint methods?
What is the status on staff training regarding restraint methods? •There is a current reading curriculum - what are the plans for math? Many parents are unaware that the reading curriculum exists?
There is a current reading curriculum - what are the plans for math? Many parents are unaware that the reading curriculum exists? •Offering Alternative Therapy with Smiles (OATS) program rejected by the administration even though they were offered at no cost to district. Attachment 18
Offering Alternative Therapy with Smiles (OATS) program rejected by the administration even though they were offered at no cost to district. Attachment 18 •Parents are being asked to seek out free, community resources to replace those not provided by the school, i.e. parent being asked to find alternative music experiences for their child. Parents should not be held accountable to perform the functions which are the responsibility of the school.
Parents are being asked to seek out free, community resources to replace those not provided by the school, i.e. parent being asked to find alternative music experiences for their child. Parents should not be held accountable to perform the functions which are the responsibility of the school. 5.General Concerns
General Concerns•Little or no administrative support from for substitute teachers placed in Special Ed. classrooms.
Little or no administrative support from for substitute teachers placed in Special Ed. classrooms.•Parent requested formal reports and testing prior to IEP. Was told by school psychologist “we only do that for retarded kids”.
Parent requested formal reports and testing prior to IEP. Was told by school psychologist “we only do that for retarded kids”. •Why are qualified, endorsed Special Ed instructors returning to general education classrooms or leaving the district?
Why are qualified, endorsed Special Ed instructors returning to general education classrooms or leaving the district?•Parents should not be held responsible to perform the functions that the school is legally responsible to provide.
Parents should not be held responsible to perform the functions that the school is legally responsible to provide. •FAR, a community resource, has available art, music and adapted physical education services. These services are marginally utilized or not taken advantage of by the BPS administration. In fact, BPS administration is giving parents false information regarding their service performance in reference to another district.
FAR, a community resource, has available art, music and adapted physical education services. These services are marginally utilized or not taken advantage of by the BPS administration. In fact, BPS administration is giving parents false information regarding their service performance in reference to another district. Closing Remarks and Discussion
Fact/Fiction
In December, 2006, Susan Safranski responded to concerns raised by parents of AI students by having a meeting. Below is Ms. Safranski's note that she sent to those who attended that meeting.
BIRMINGHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Director of Special Education 550 West Merrill Birmingham, Michigan 48009
248-203-3017 ss02bps@birmingham.k12.mi.us
Susan Safranski.
January 14, 2007
Dear Parents,
At the beginning of December, you were invited to a meeting with the special education supervisors and me to discuss the AI Center program. The Parent Advisory Committee (PAC) shared with me that some of you were feeling “out of the loop.” I felt it was important that the supervisors and I hear from you directly about how you thought things were going. I want to express my appreciation to all who attended. It ended up to be a very snowy night when driving was risky and I think attendance was a little lower than it might have been because of that. We had approximately 18 parents representing all levels from kindergarten through high school. I don’t believe any parents from the post high school program attended. I felt you should get some feedback if you weren’t able to be there.
We heard about many things that were going well. The parents praised both of the preschool teachers saying that they felt very supported by them. They liked the improvement in curriculum across grades and appreciated the opportunities their children had to be included in general education classrooms. This year we have introduced adaptive PE and the parents seemed to feel their children were benefiting more than ever from physical education classes and swimming. Some parents reported that their children’s programs were enhanced due to collaboration between the resource program teacher and the AI teacher. As a matter of fact, I have heard that the benefit has definitely gone both ways. The parents also praised the work of the speech pathologist a BCS.
This year we had an increase in students at the middle school level. We were unable to locate space at BCS or Berkshire so we combined two classes in a large new room at Derby. We ended up with even more students than we expected. The number of students in one space and the complexity of the students’ needs created a challenging situation that required collaboration and cooperation. Thanks to the efforts of the principal, Debbie Hubbell and special education team members, Pat Katchman and Nancy Kocsis, we were able to divide the classes and things have improved. The parents expressed their gratitude for the change. The Derby peer helper program (Links) has really taken off. Gradually, school by school, we are seeing the Links program have a positive effect increasing the acceptance of the AI students and increasing their opportunities. The goal is to have a LINKS program in each school.
Parents also had some concerns. I tried to respond to as many of those as I could at the time. I’ll repeat those here and update you on the status of things that were not addressed.
There was one concern about a speech pathologist’s lack of knowledge of oral motor problems of students. This was too specific an issue to clarify at the time. However, I encouraged that parent to have more conversation with the speech pathologist, the teacher and, perhaps, the supervisor to assure that the child’s problems are being adequately handled. A new parent to the program expressed her concern that the AI preschool at Quarton didn’t seem to be a part of the school. That is a new class this year and I advised her that it takes time for a new group (teacher included) to develop the relationships and become part of the school family. The good news is that there is a strong commitment on the part of all our principals to bring all children into their school community.
Transportation was another issue. One parent reminded the group that a different department administers transportation. I reported that the teachers and supervisors work with the transportation department to resolve problems. Members of the Parent Advisory Committee and myself met with Transportation last year and will do that again to discuss the concerns. Last year we learned that routing buses is a very complicated endeavor. Nowadays it is a challenge to maintain experienced substitutes. One situation was particularly worrisome. The parent and I worked on that until it was finally settled last week.
As much as some parents praised improvement in the curriculum, others had concerns. The best way I can answer this is to explain to you that the State of Michigan is setting some very clear standards for students with disabilities. They are providing us with expectations that are in line with the general curriculum and describe what students should be learning at each grade level depending on the student’s level of independence in adulthood. The Michigan Department of Education has begun to provide us with curricula that also support predicted levels of independence. The department has been distributing the resources from the state as soon as we receive them. Last year several parents of special education students tested the draft documents with cognitive disabilities as a reference during their children’s IEPs. They reported that the curriculum was very helpful. The use of these curricula will also make it much easier for the teachers to plan for students at a variety of cognitive levels in their classrooms.
As you know the state has included students with disabilities in the statewide assessment system. They are comparing the progress of a district’s students with disabilities with the state/county average of non-disabled students and the average of disabled students. Additionally, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is requiring that programs use research-based programs for instruction. The teachers have responded very positively to these changes and the new accountability. This is something that we will all be learning and implementing and continuously improving.
Parents raised the issue of videos being used in AI classrooms. They expressed a concern about the fact that the videos might not have a valid instructional value, waste students’ time and have a negative impact on some autistic characteristics. Soon after our meeting, I sent a memo to staff requesting that they eliminate videos from their lesson plans unless approved by a supervisor.
Related to the curriculum issues were the concerns expressed about community-based instruction (CBI) and field trips. At the meeting, I advised the parents that when I became director, I was concerned about the number of field trips that were occurring in the Autistic Program that had no relationship to curriculum or individual student goals
Field trips are defined as whole-class activities outside of the school building that support achievement of outcomes specified in the general curriculum. They might also be opportunities for socialization with non-handicapped peers. Field trips are limited to one or two per year consistent with the field trips permitted for general education students. Exceptions to this general rule will be considered if the field trip/s provide significant opportunities to participate in activities with general education students. These might include joining a general education class on their annual field trip or creating a trip for AI students and general education students as a reward to peer helpers. Consistent with the high standards of instruction for general education students, AI teachers should develop field trip experiences that reinforce or enrich instruction that is based on curriculum. They should define expected outcomes. Teachers must complete the Field Trip Approval Form and obtain approval from their supervisor at least two weeks ahead of time.
CBIs are activities outside of the school building that support accomplishment of an individual student’s IEP goals. A decision to take instruction outside of the classroom is made when the IEP team, which includes the parent, determines that the only way a goal can be accomplished is in an authentic setting that is not available within the school building. The frequency and length of time should be determined by and described in a Community-based Instruction Plan. The CBI continues until the specified goal has been reached. A supervisor must approve the plan. Generally, most elementary-aged students learn social and practical skills within the school setting. For this reason, CBIs at that level would be rare. At middle, high school and post high school, students without disabilities are starting to do things independently in the community. At this point, it would be expected that AI students to would be trained in practical skills in their classrooms. An attempt would be made to generalize the skills in the school and then out in the community. I reviewed the log of CBIs for the department and saw that these opportunities do increase as the students move through middle school into high school and post high school.
Troy Daze is a very popular event in our area. On the Friday of Troy Daze, the rides are slowed and students with disabilities are invited from the surrounding communities. Parents have been disappointed that the AI program has not gone to this as a whole group in recent years. Some teachers are choosing other activities. This year only three teachers requested approval to attend this as a field trip. All three classes were given permission to go. Unfortunately, it seemed that some parents felt that only a few classes attended because there was a strong department edict. I promised at the meeting to have the supervisors clarify with the teachers and teams how to make decisions about field trips and apply for approval.
Another issue brought to my attention involves paraprofessionals. A parent indicated that a paraprofessional staff member had indicated that she (the parapro) could no longer speak with the parent. As you know we utilize the services of paraprofessionals to protect their student safety and assist them with mobility and physical care. It is important to note that independence is a primary goal that we have for all students. For students with autism who require Center placement, the level of their independence in adulthood will vary. Paraprofessionals have also supported our AI students in the general education classroom. One parent indicated that recently a para had told her that she could no longer speak with the parent. The parent needed to speak with the teacher instead. I was troubled to think that our department’s new direction for parapros been misinterpreted. I have attached my article from the last Friends of Different Learners newsletter to explain the role we are expecting of paras and why.
Another concern was the location of the AI classrooms at Seaholm. The PAC had already brought this concern to my attention and the attention of the superintendent. I think the district has demonstrated it’s respect and caring for the Autistic Program with the beautiful rooms that were constructed in the new elementary buildings. These rooms are all in corridors with classrooms of non-disabled students. They are connected to resource rooms by team meeting rooms. Each of these buildings also has OT/PT rooms. The high school space was renovated seven years ago at the time that Seaholm went under major renovations. Care was given to locating the rooms together and one has a complete kitchen for the teaching of life skills. A restroom is located right next to the classrooms. This has proven to be essential as several of the students are not toilet-trained and the dedicated bathroom protects their dignity. The parents object to the classrooms being on the lower level. A door connecting to the corridor to other classrooms is closed and this makes it seem to the parents like the rooms are isolated. The three rooms have all passed inspections for safety. The door that exits to the outside cannot be locked for exiting because of fire safety codes. There is an alarm to alert staff if a student tries to exit through the door. Finding an equivalent space in a different location in the building will be expensive and difficult. However, the administration cares about the parent concern and is studying the issue.
As you are probably aware, there are two long-term subs helping us while teachers are out on leave. Parents expressed concern about how the rooms were operating and if the teachers were being given adequate support. I had visited one of the rooms and was very impressed to see all of the students engaged in meaningful activities. There was a question about whether or not the students were using their visual organizers. Upon investigation, I learned that the visual schedules, communication boards etc. had been updated last spring. Nancy Kocsis, our AI TC, has spent many days working with both subs. The student IEPs are being followed and the visual organizers are being used.
This year our AI students have had increased opportunities to participate with their non-disabled peers. This is occurring in the general education classrooms, in specials, during recess, at lunch and on field trips. One parent expressed concern about “too much inclusion.” Please remember that decisions about integrating your child should be made at the IEP. Just because the opportunities have increased does not mean that integration must be part of your child’s program. Another parent asked about inclusion in a resource room. This is not considered to be an ideal arrangement and would not really be regarded as inclusion but a different special education service.
Adaptive PE has led to more effective instruction both in swimming and in physical education. Parents asked about the possibility of more swimming. Please keep in mind that there is still a need for extensive instruction in other areas in order for your students to progress at the rate you and the State of Michigan expect. It is important we consider the impact increased swimming would have on the other instructional areas.
Parents also feel that they do not have enough opportunity to communicate with the OT or PT. Generally, the OT or PT share their information with the caseload teachers who communicate with the parents. If there is a concern, the parent can always ask the teacher to arrange for the opportunity to speak with the therapist. Sensory equipment is provided by the school district. If a staff member does not feel that there is adequate equipment for a program, their next step would be to discuss this with the appropriate supervisor.
I also want to address the questions regarding the AI summer program. The program was reduced to three days over a seven week period last summer. Due to the longer summer break some parents suggested running the program into August so the students would not have four weeks without programming. This year the summer program will return to its previous format of four days for six weeks from June 25 to Aug. 9, 9:00 A.M. to 2:00P.M. with no program during the week of July 4th.
Finally, the last topic was related to food issues. The children of several parents are on special diets or have allergies. This is an important issue to discuss with your child’s caseload teacher. The teacher might need to monitor snacks or work with you to develop a Care Plan if there is a danger of the student experiencing an allergic reaction. Both the diet and allergy concerns might need to be shared with the bus driver.
Thank you for your patience through a very lengthy letter. Please watch for updates from me on department issues. The updates will be posted on the department web page. In order to access the updates, go on to the district website. In the upper left-hand corner select “Department.” At the bottom of the list find and select “Special Education.”
In closing, on behalf of the special education department, I want to reassure you that your concerns and questions are very important to us. We are truly committed to providing your child with the very best in programs and services. Thank you for this opportunity to respond to those concerns.
Sincerely,
Susan Safranski
___________________________________________________________________________________
FOIA documents, info on special ed director salary, corrective actions, etc.
FOIA documents, info on special ed director salary, corrective actions, etc.
Oakland Schools Investigation Report of Case # C-5980-06
The Complaint of Marcie Lipsitt Against School District of the City of Birmingham
Michigan Dept. of Education
Investigation Report of Case #C-5897-06
The Complaint of Ms. Marcie Lipsitt against the Birmingham School District
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
