I am bringing this over from the last blog topic to continue the conversation here
Karen, had I known it was you that wrote that comment I wouldn't have responded because I know you are as informed as anyone in this process AND you are very even minded. I heard some comments the other night from many who I know are not informed and I just wanted to be sure that those who may not be aware of the process understand that the district wasn't setting out to close Maple.
Unfortunately for us Maple due to size, demographic/location, API, etc. falls in an area that makes us vulnerable at every turn. I think the only thing at this point that will save us is finding a way to show the district that fiscally it isn't necessary to close a school, or to show them why it doesn't make sense to close Maple.
I hear what you are saying Tammy about the face of Maple changing should any school close. No matter what happens, if Maple closes or a neighboring school it will bring change to our area.
I think closing a school that receives Title 1 funding (Conejo, Manzanita, even Walnut) will probably never happen. Even though the school who receives the funds is the only one that benefits from the money the district indirectly benefits because that is money the school receives to educate those of low income that they would have to find elsewhere. If they disperse the population of children who are receiving free and reduced lunch to other campuses, the percentages that receive it verses those who don't receive it would eliminate much of the funding that the district (indirectly) receives from Title 1. Again, this is just my opinion. I think Mike Dunn may have a steep hill to climb if he tries to go after Manzanita. They have some incredible programs over there via Pepperdine and the SHRUBS program. I don't see the district going after them at this point, not after all the criteria has been set and they have come out clear.
The only way I see us dodging this bullet is through the secondary criteria. We have to show them that some things are worth more than money. A safe inclusive environment for children of special needs to work alongside typical kids benefits learning for everyone. Some things matter more than others...I personally feel that children who are learning English as a second language don't have learning deficits generally speaking, they just speak a different language. From what I have seen studies show that kids who are learning English as a second language actually succeed better in the end if they are mixed with children who speak the new language. Kids with special needs have more specialized needs. They often have communication issues that can't be solved by learning a new language, often times they are still learning to speak a first language. They need a safe, organized environment to learn. I feel the biggest mistake in the secondary criteria is putting those with special needs in the same criteria as those with "diversity" and those who have to travel certain distances over major highways. Let's be real folks, most kids are driven to school these days...what does it matter if the kids have to drive over a major highway. In my opinion a program (an inclusive campus) that has taken as long to develop as well as they have developed it, is way more important in the end. It shouldn't be disrupted, that to me matters WAY more than whether or not a kid has to cross a major highway. To weigh those things equally is crazy to my way of thinking.
I completely agree with you. To place a child's ability to learn on the same level with crossing major streets is absurd. Especially when you look at the existing school boundaries. Both Acacia and Aspen have students that must travel across the 101 in order to get to school. Banyan has students that live much closer to Manzanita than to Banyan. And when you look at criteria 2 and 3, the schools listed as "adjacent" or "receiving" schools in many cases cross other school zones. The reason for this is that the schools are within a 2.5 mile radius, but is the school district really going to send students from Wildwood across the school boundaries of Aspen to attend Acacia? The data used for the blind case study is full of errors and flaws. The school board needs to go back to the drawing board.
Aside from those blatant errors, they cannot tell me that my son, in the special day class at Maple, will receive the same level of education if they move the program to another school. Autistic children do not handle any kind of change well. They do not know how to. It is not just a matter of dealing with a new school, either. It is the years that our teachers and staff have put into integrating the special day class with full inclusion. My son has had mainstream teachers who have rearranged their teaching schedules to help him. The students have walked hand in hand with these children since kindergarten and have learned that their "odd behavior" is no more controllable than having to sneeze. You just cannot duplicate what we have at Maple.
Rebecca, I believe that all you state is the argument we need to use. For one simple reason, it is TRUE!
The district has moved to where they are now in an open and honest fashion. What we have now is a difference of opinion on what is contained in the secondary criteria and which part of it is most important. We need to be sure that the kids with special needs are NOT forgotten and they aren't relegated as "portable". There is so much more than meets the eye to making a program like Maple has successful. In my opinion it cannot be moved and immediately replicated easily somewhere else. To say it can is to under emphasize all the work that Maple has done to this point. I truly feel this may be our only valid leg to stand on. They have looked at everything else from every other angle (I am not suggesting that some of our brilliant parents may not find something in what the district has done so far to challenge, it is just up until now I am not seeing it). Schools may need to close for fiscal reasons but at some point we need to see certain aspects of our children's lives as more important than the bottom line. Schools in the end may need to close, hopefully not at the expense of certain members of our student population that can't speak for themselves as easily as others do.
I would like to say a heartfelt thanks to everyone who has expressed concern about the special day class. I know there are many parents fighting for Maple's special day class who do not have children in the program. There are also many parents involved whose children will not be affected by any school closures. It really shows me what a special community we have and what wonderful parents we have. I am very encouraged by all of the support. Maple is truly a special place.
Rebecca, You are so right, Maple is such a special place and the community who is a part of it is special as well. That is one reason why I don't want our reputation as such a caring community (Wall of Inclusion, Make a Wish work) to be tainted in our effort to stand our ground. I don't want to see Manzanita trashed during this process...as someone said on the VCStar website, comparing Maple and Manzanita is like comparing Apples to Oranges...one doesn't have to do with the other in my opinion. Our job isn't to tell the district who they should close should the need arise, in my opinion our community would be better served if we find reasons why they shouldn't close us. My hope is that we don't find our population insulting Manzanita as time goes on...I don't want that anymore than I would want them insulting us because of our special needs population, ya know what I mean? My hope is that all involved keep it civil. I was a little bummed at the trashing that Manzanita received the other night. There are some amazing people over there that feel just as passionate about how great their school is as we do and for good reason. There are some great things going on at Manzanita.
Having said that, I am one of those people you mentioned, I don't have kids in the special day classes. I have two children who have gone through Maple (my oldest is now in the 8th grade) and as I said the other night both of my children have gotten so much more than they have gained by attending Maple and being a part of the inclusion process. Both of my children have participated in Lunch Bunch and/or communication lab with the special day classes and have been given a greater understanding of the world as a whole because of it. My youngest is a 5th grader (who serves on student council) who ends her time at Maple come June. I am invested in this process because I feel that strongly that Maple is such a special place...my hope is that it just doesn't cease to exist.
I do know that this is an uphill climb, my 3 years on DAC listening to the reasons the district feels it may be necessary it close schools tells me that. I honestly don't know what chance Maple has at survival but I do think the inclusion that happens on our campus is worth trying to protect.
5 comments:
I am bringing this over from the last blog topic to continue the conversation here
Karen, had I known it was you that wrote that comment I wouldn't have responded because I know you are as informed as anyone in this process AND you are very even minded. I heard some comments the other night from many who I know are not informed and I just wanted to be sure that those who may not be aware of the process understand that the district wasn't setting out to close Maple.
Unfortunately for us Maple due to size, demographic/location, API, etc. falls in an area that makes us vulnerable at every turn. I think the only thing at this point that will save us is finding a way to show the district that fiscally it isn't necessary to close a school, or to show them why it doesn't make sense to close Maple.
I hear what you are saying Tammy about the face of Maple changing should any school close. No matter what happens, if Maple closes or a neighboring school it will bring change to our area.
I think closing a school that receives Title 1 funding (Conejo, Manzanita, even Walnut) will probably never happen. Even though the school who receives the funds is the only one that benefits from the money the district indirectly benefits because that is money the school receives to educate those of low income that they would have to find elsewhere. If they disperse the population of children who are receiving free and reduced lunch to other campuses, the percentages that receive it verses those who don't receive it would eliminate much of the funding that the district (indirectly) receives from Title 1. Again, this is just my opinion. I think Mike Dunn may have a steep hill to climb if he tries to go after Manzanita. They have some incredible programs over there via Pepperdine and the SHRUBS program. I don't see the district going after them at this point, not after all the criteria has been set and they have come out clear.
The only way I see us dodging this bullet is through the secondary criteria. We have to show them that some things are worth more than money. A safe inclusive environment for children of special needs to work alongside typical kids benefits learning for everyone. Some things matter more than others...I personally feel that children who are learning English as a second language don't have learning deficits generally speaking, they just speak a different language. From what I have seen studies show that kids who are learning English as a second language actually succeed better in the end if they are mixed with children who speak the new language. Kids with special needs have more specialized needs. They often have communication issues that can't be solved by learning a new language, often times they are still learning to speak a first language. They need a safe, organized environment to learn. I feel the biggest mistake in the secondary criteria is putting those with special needs in the same criteria as those with "diversity" and those who have to travel certain distances over major highways. Let's be real folks, most kids are driven to school these days...what does it matter if the kids have to drive over a major highway. In my opinion a program (an inclusive campus) that has taken as long to develop as well as they have developed it, is way more important in the end. It shouldn't be disrupted, that to me matters WAY more than whether or not a kid has to cross a major highway. To weigh those things equally is crazy to my way of thinking.
I completely agree with you. To place a child's ability to learn on the same level with crossing major streets is absurd. Especially when you look at the existing school boundaries. Both Acacia and Aspen have students that must travel across the 101 in order to get to school. Banyan has students that live much closer to Manzanita than to Banyan. And when you look at criteria 2 and 3, the schools listed as "adjacent" or "receiving" schools in many cases cross other school zones. The reason for this is that the schools are within a 2.5 mile radius, but is the school district really going to send students from Wildwood across the school boundaries of Aspen to attend Acacia? The data used for the blind case study is full of errors and flaws. The school board needs to go back to the drawing board.
Aside from those blatant errors, they cannot tell me that my son, in the special day class at Maple, will receive the same level of education if they move the program to another school. Autistic children do not handle any kind of change well. They do not know how to. It is not just a matter of dealing with a new school, either. It is the years that our teachers and staff have put into integrating the special day class with full inclusion. My son has had mainstream teachers who have rearranged their teaching schedules to help him. The students have walked hand in hand with these children since kindergarten and have learned that their "odd behavior" is no more controllable than having to sneeze. You just cannot duplicate what we have at Maple.
Rebecca, I believe that all you state is the argument we need to use. For one simple reason, it is TRUE!
The district has moved to where they are now in an open and honest fashion. What we have now is a difference of opinion on what is contained in the secondary criteria and which part of it is most important. We need to be sure that the kids with special needs are NOT forgotten and they aren't relegated as "portable". There is so much more than meets the eye to making a program like Maple has successful. In my opinion it cannot be moved and immediately replicated easily somewhere else. To say it can is to under emphasize all the work that Maple has done to this point. I truly feel this may be our only valid leg to stand on. They have looked at everything else from every other angle (I am not suggesting that some of our brilliant parents may not find something in what the district has done so far to challenge, it is just up until now I am not seeing it). Schools may need to close for fiscal reasons but at some point we need to see certain aspects of our children's lives as more important than the bottom line. Schools in the end may need to close, hopefully not at the expense of certain members of our student population that can't speak for themselves as easily as others do.
I would like to say a heartfelt thanks to everyone who has expressed concern about the special day class. I know there are many parents fighting for Maple's special day class who do not have children in the program. There are also many parents involved whose children will not be affected by any school closures. It really shows me what a special community we have and what wonderful parents we have. I am very encouraged by all of the support. Maple is truly a special place.
Rebecca,
You are so right, Maple is such a special place and the community who is a part of it is special as well. That is one reason why I don't want our reputation as such a caring community (Wall of Inclusion, Make a Wish work) to be tainted in our effort to stand our ground. I don't want to see Manzanita trashed during this process...as someone said on the VCStar website, comparing Maple and Manzanita is like comparing Apples to Oranges...one doesn't have to do with the other in my opinion. Our job isn't to tell the district who they should close should the need arise, in my opinion our community would be better served if we find reasons why they shouldn't close us. My hope is that we don't find our population insulting Manzanita as time goes on...I don't want that anymore than I would want them insulting us because of our special needs population, ya know what I mean? My hope is that all involved keep it civil. I was a little bummed at the trashing that Manzanita received the other night. There are some amazing people over there that feel just as passionate about how great their school is as we do and for good reason. There are some great things going on at Manzanita.
Having said that, I am one of those people you mentioned, I don't have kids in the special day classes. I have two children who have gone through Maple (my oldest is now in the 8th grade) and as I said the other night both of my children have gotten so much more than they have gained by attending Maple and being a part of the inclusion process. Both of my children have participated in Lunch Bunch and/or communication lab with the special day classes and have been given a greater understanding of the world as a whole because of it. My youngest is a 5th grader (who serves on student council) who ends her time at Maple come June. I am invested in this process because I feel that strongly that Maple is such a special place...my hope is that it just doesn't cease to exist.
I do know that this is an uphill climb, my 3 years on DAC listening to the reasons the district feels it may be necessary it close schools tells me that. I honestly don't know what chance Maple has at survival but I do think the inclusion that happens on our campus is worth trying to protect.
Post a Comment