First Hour Ross Kaminski, Matt Dunn and Joshua Sharf Second Hour Ross Kaminski, Matt Dunn and Joshua Sharf
Third Hour Ross Kaminski, Matt Dunn and Joshua Sharf
Teacher's Desk: Special Ed & Charters
There's a controversy over the enrollment disparity of special education students in charter schools vis-a-vis district schools. The Denver Post editorialized about this on June 15, based on an earlier story by their own Jeremy Meyer. He found that charter schools average 7% of student enrollment identified as special education and whereas the figure for district schools is 10%. I’ve worked in both district and charter schools and my personal experience does not match this report! Montbello High School, where I worked for 2 ½ years, had approximately 10% of its student population designated as special education and the school served as the center program for two different special education populations. There were also five of us working as mild/moderate special educators and each of us carried a case load of about thirty-five students.
Then, I worked for both KIPP College Prep, a middle school, and Academy of Urban Learning, an alternative charter high school. My percent of special education students at KIPP as a percent of enrollment was 20% and at AUL was approximately 25%. At Colorado High School Charter, I have had a high of 25% of student population identified as special education and a low of 10% of student population identified as special education students.
Many parents of special education look for schools that are highly structured and/or have small classes so that their special needs child does not fall through the cracks. That is why so many urban parents are trying to place their special education students in Denver charter schools. I also have many students not qualifying for special education, but who have significant gaps in learning and are also four to seven years behind grade level after a career in district schools from around the metropolitan area.
The problem, as I see it, is not that special education students are being turned away at charter schools, because I have seen that happen a both district and a charter school, but what do parents want for their special education students and why are the district schools not offering it. What can some charter schools do better to provide for special education students and recruit to parents of special education students?
I discovered parents want their special education students to have small classes providing more one-on-one attention. They want parents that will work with their children and them -- and communicate to them! They want their students to continue to improve both their weaknesses and strengths. They want their students to have as normal and productive life as possible and this may include college or post-secondary education. These folks really are not asking for anything that we don’t all want for our children.
The only way we can all get it right, is to provide smaller settings with quality instruction for all our students. If this means districts turn all their schools into charters -- fine, but we must also make sure that we have enough smaller school settings for the students that need them. Whether it is a charter school or a regular district school, when the school is too large, too many students fall through the cracks because the educators lose the time and ability to serve all students well. I am sure the small size of my classes and the extra help I can give to students is why so many of my students flourish.
One of the reasons that some special education students are turned away from some charters is that after the principal and special educator look at the previous IEP (Individual Education Plan), they discover the special education hours to be served on the IEP are not attainable by many schools. The accommodations and information about the student makes them appear to need center school enrollment. I am here to say---they probably do not, and may do very well with a change of settings. I have even taken cognitively disabled students that end up performing better than their IEP would indicate. All of us need to give these students a chance. Kathleen Kullback is a licensed special educator at Colorado High School Charter with an M. A. in educational leadership and is a former candidate to the State Board of Education.
Father's Day on the Divide
Slated on Backbone Radio, June 21 Listen every Sunday, 5-8pm on 710 KNUS, Denver... 1460 KZNT, Colorado Springs... and streaming live at 710knus.com.
What would become of Father's Day if the whole culture and political system grew indifferent to men and women marrying each other, if most babies came from labs and acquired their parents through agencies, if the family itself were declared a toxic institution as some feminists and Marxists claim? Sorry for the downer, but doesn't that seem to be where Western civilization (formerly so called) is heading unless some of us who love tradition start fighting harder and turn things around?
Well, take heart. Fighting the good fight, even on a weekend that ought to be about celebration and relaxation, is our way of life in Backbone Colorado USA. Up here on the Divide, we still draw a line between good and bad, between natural and otherwise. Tune in Sunday and let's think together about keeping Father's Day and other American institutions alive for coming generations.
** We'll talk Iran with policy expert Daveed Gartenstein-Ross... health care reform with patient rights advocate Amy Menefee... and Republican strategy with former congressman Bob Beauprez.
** Authors Ward Connerly (Lessons from My Uncle James)... Joseph C. Phillips (He Talk Like a White Boy)... and Allen Orcutt (No Rest Elsewhere)... will share their perspectives as sons and dads.
Yours for America without apologies, JOHN ANDREWS
Same old same old Sonia
(Denver Post, June 21) “It is a small state, and yet there are those who love it.” Sen. Daniel Webster, arguing the Dartmouth case before the Supreme Court, actually said “college,” not “state.” But my paraphrase is apropos for Coloradans in a summer when the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor has everyone talking about senators and justices. We do love this smallish state of ours, and jealousy for Colorado’s prerogatives of self-government is in order as we debate replacing David Souter. “Don’t tread on me,” the defiant flag of the founding era, has made a comeback at this year’s Tea Parties. Does Sotomayor get that? Not that I can tell, which means she’s wrong for the court. Of the three federal branches, claimed Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist, “the judiciary will always be the least dangerous to the Constitution,” as it has neither “the sword or the purse.” Decades of judicial imperialism have left that prediction as devalued as Hamilton’s $10 bill.
More accurate was his rival Robert Yates, who wrote in the Anti-Federalist that history had never seen “a court of justice invested with such immense powers, and yet placed in a situation so little responsible.” He worried that the Supreme Court would “be able to extend the limits of the general government gradually” and at last “to melt down the states into one entire government for every purpose.”
Did Yates exaggerate? Not much. From FDR’s time to Obama’s, regardless of which party appointed them, the robed priesthood of the bench has overseen more and more of American governance gravitating from state capitals to Washington and from the elected branches to themselves.
Is there blame to go around? Yes; every part of our body politic has helped weaken liberty. We’re now getting the government we deserve. Does history hinge on Sotomayor’s confirmation or defeat? No; “wise Latina woman” or not, she’s just one judge. We the people must initiate the needed constitutional rebirth.
It’s dismaying, though, how oblivious most politicians are to the high court’s part in turning free citizens into docile “sheeple” (Pravda’s mocking word). Seeking some comprehension of the crisis, I asked Colorado’s senators, Michael Bennet and Mark Udall, what our smaller state with its commitment to participative self-government should constitutionally expect from the Supreme Court. The answers came back bland as sand.
“Coloradans want judges who are fair, impartial, and faithfully apply the law,” said Bennet, adding that he hopes for a sensitivity to “our special concerns in the West” about water rights, public lands, and the role of government. Udall told me the qualities he’s looking for include “moderation, an ability to listen and bridge ideological divides, and above all, a deep understanding of the constitution.” Unlike Bennet, who came out for Sotomayor after a brief meeting, Udall is uncommitted though leaning favorably.
The danger of senators rubber-stamping a president’s judicial nominees, predicted by Oliver Ellsworth at the 1787 convention, seems borne out by these two in relation to fellow Democrat Barack Obama. They need remediation from CU law professor Robert Nagel, author of “Unrestrained: Judicial Excess and the Mind of the American Lawyer.” Nagel says legal groupthink has made the whole country politically timid and “slavish in believing we need to be saved by the Supreme Court” from the messiness of democracy.
Former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Jean Dubofsky, another Democrat and the first woman on that bench, supports Sotomayor but said she too wishes for a high court with more “out in the world experience” and fewer Ivy-trained Easterners with appellate resumes like this nominee.
Very true, and by that yardstick I’d prefer Dubofsky herself, or Bennet or Udall, or Bill Ritter or Pat Schroeder, to Judge Sonia. Liberals all – but any of them would be less susceptible to the seductive superstition of Supremes as Saviors.
BHO spineless on Iran
Amidst US passivity toward Iran's stolen election, "some doctor needs to give President Obama a backbone transplant." says John Andrews in the June round of Head On TV debates. But Susan Barnes-Gelt praises Obama's "calm and neutral" approach to the Islamic republic's "internal wrangling." John on the right, Susan on the left, also go at it this month over the GM takeover, Sotomayor, health care, and Colorado's faltering Democrats. Head On has been a daily feature on Colorado Public Television since 1997. Here are all five scripts for June:1. ELECTIONS IN IRAN Susan: Iran is in turmoil after demonstrators defied government warning and continued to protest Ahmadinejad's reelection in Tehran's Freedom Square. Myriad sources allege rampant voter fraud against reformer Challenger Mousavi. Even the Wizard - powerful Ayatollah Khamenei, appears to be backing down. Civil disobedience is powerful.
John: An uprising by ordinary Iranians that throws the Muslim theocrats out of power would be huge. Directly beneficial to Iraq and Lebanon, also a big relief to Israel and America. We should hope for that, but prepare for continued confrontation. Some doctor needs to give President Obama a backbone transplant.
Susan: Obama is doing the right thing by remaining calm and neutral regarding the uprising in Iran. The last thing this country should do is interfere in the internal political wrangling of a country in disarray. The key - as in the 1979 Revolution, is the clerics.
John: US policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran has been counter-productive for decades. Carter and Reagan dealt ineffectively with these murderous fanatics. So have Bush and Obama. With nukes, the mullahs could trigger the end times they lust for. Please, Mr. President, listen to your inner JFK.
2. GENERAL MOTORS NOW GOVT OWNED
John: Taxpayers including the two of us are now majority stockholders of General Motors. After claiming he didn’t want to take over the auto industry, Obama did, and even Pravda is laughing. What a terrible idea. Federal ownership of key factories can only mean a less productive, less prosperous America.
Susan: If private ownership of the American auto industry is any example of capitalism at its best, we are in big trouble. Obama took a calculated risk - giving support while the industry retools for the 21st Century. The alternative might have been much worse.
John: Barack is on a power trip, not a rescue mission. So now the fumbling federal bureaucrats who wrecked the postal service and bankrupted social security will attempt to run basic manufacturing for the world’s economic powerhouse. Only bad can come of this, and most Americans know it.
Susan: Right - and the corporate guys were such visionary leaders - For example, Joe Nacchio, the Enron and AIG boys, the heads of Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns or Lehmann - but we're talking the auto industry - Those guys really understood the market - don't ya think?
3. SOTOMAYOR NOMINATED FOR HIGH COURT
John: Judge Sonia Sotomayor with her political skills and compelling story might be a good senator. She’d definitely be a better vice president than Biden. But Sotomayor is wrong the Supreme Court. Her claim that race or gender makes one judge superior to another is outrageous. That’s bigoted – and un-American.
Susan: Appointing someone to the Supreme Court who graduated summa sum laude & Phi Bete from Princeton and was editor of the Yale law review and served as a prosecutor, trial judge and federal appellate judge is above reproach. That Sonia Sotomayor is a Latina is a bonus.
John: Sotomayor didn’t just call it a bonus. She explicitly that being Hispanic and female makes her better qualified than you as an Anglo or me as a man. Archie Bunker couldn’t have said it better. Tina Fay wouldn’t have dared. Dr. King wouldn’t have dreamed. Wrong judge. Vote no. Start over.
Susan: John, elections have consequences - perhaps none more long-lasting than judicial appointments. Whatever Sotomayor said when speaking in public forums, her record as a jurist is impeccable, moderate and clearly a reflection of Obama's values and intelligence. She will be confirmed and will serve with distinction.
4. HEALTH CARE REFORM
Susan: The public option for health care is key. Private insurers exist to make money - lots of it. Since most of us don't chose our insurance, private providers operate free of competition. Lowest bid wins, not best health outcome. The most successful have the most exclusions, highest co-pays and aggressively deny claims.
John: Government health care means rationed health care, Susan. Anyone in middle age or beyond – such as you and me – faces a future where coldhearted bureaucrats with actuarial charts will decide our quality of life, maybe even our date of death. Canada and Britain are already there. I say, no thanks.
Susan: The operative word in for profit health insurance companies is profit - not health. As a result, exclusions, co-pays, decisions about medication, surgery and treatment are not made to serve the patient or the doctor. Decisions are made to feed the bottom line. The system is broken.
John: Four trillion of new costs on top of an already insolvent entitlement system. That’s the price for Obama’s socialized medicine. We’re talking a thousand billion dollars, then another thousand billion, another and another. We’re talking a phony public option that quickly swallows all the private options. Don’t do it, America.
5. WILL RITTER FACE A PRIMARY?
John: Bill Ritter tore it with organized labor and many Democrats when he cast two vetoes on legislation that unions really wanted. Mayor Hickenlooper having to announce he won’t challenge the governor in a primary, only shows how badly wounded Ritter is for 2010. I wonder if Andrew Romanoff will make a run.
Susan: Ritter might face a more difficult challenge in a primary than from the R's preparing to run against him. On the other hand, Michael Bennet might be easier to knock off in a primary. Ritter has a solid base of environmentalists & Dems. Bennet is still unknown.
John: The common denominator is two of Obama’s big pals facing cloudy political prospects in a state they were supposed to own. The president is popular nationally, but Democrats in Colorado are wearing out their welcome. Change is now a Republican issue. Ritter and Bennet may both go down in 2010.
Susan: Wish I could buy what you're smokin'! Sure the top of the Dem's ticket is weak, but for either Ritter or Bennet to lose, the R's have to field viable candidates with strong, centrist messages, name ID and a political base. Hmm - puff puff.