Special Education Follies

A hat tip to my buddy George at Mimmenblog for beating me to the punch on this matter, but I thought my unique analysis wouldn't hurt. As a teacher, few subjects drive me up the wall more than the saga of Special Education. I am not a Special Ed teacher. My exposure to this subject comes from three sources; two minor, and one huge. As a substitute teacher, I subbed for a special ed class two times, as a regular teacher, I have covered for an absent special ed teacher twice. Now here is the kicker: as a regular teacher, I deal with special ed kids on a daily basis who have been mainstreamed into regular classes, then receive extra services as needed from the special ed teachers. I have sat in countless Individualized Education Plan (IEP) meetings, where all these accomodations are made for the little sweetheart student who then proceeds to walk into my and other teacher's classrooms like a Cat 5 hurricane and disrupts the education of all the other students in my classroom. In my opinion, mainstreaming special ed students is one of the worst things to ever happen to our public school system. I teach so many special ed students who should not be in my classroom, yet there they are. Many times, it is the parents who insists that their kid be in my classroom, and there isn't anything I can do about it. What gives the parent this power is a charming and unconstitutional federal law called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1975 (IDEA). This law "guarantees" a disabled student an education with the least restrictive environment possible. That last part translates into students being in my room who really should not be.

So why am I rambling about all of this? Here is an article about a Supreme Court decision that swings the pendulum away from overbearing parents of special ed students who want state and federal tax dollars to pay for their own kids' educations in a private school, and screw everyone else. A couple in Maryland didn't like the IEP for their kid at his public school, so they enrolled him in a private school and wanted Joe Taxpayer to pick up the tab. In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court said, "Nada." Who were the two dissenters? Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, of course; President Clinton's two contributions to the Court.

The article states that over 13% of the public school population receives special education services. That is not how it should be. The problem with IDEA is that the more money that is authorized for special ed services, the more kids are magically found who need special ed services. When IDEA was passed, the students that legislators had in mind were the truly mentally and physically feeble, not some behavior problem with a so-called "learning disability." As federal funds for special education increased, so did the scope of criteria for kids who qualified for special ed.

I'm glad the Supreme Court ruled as they did, but it was only in response to a small part of a much larger problem. Open up a copy of the Constitution and please point out to me where the federal government has the authority to fund or pass laws regarding education. Don't bother, you won't find it. What the Supreme Court should be doing is finding any federal involvement in education - be it IDEA, the ESEA, Title I, or NCLB - to be unconstitutional, and kick education matters back to the states where it belongs.

Good Day to You, Sir