Tag Archives: autism

Minneapolis Public Schools Special Ed Director to Teachers: Don’t Worry, Be Happy

In an attempt to quiet the growing storm over proposed changes to the citywide autism program she oversees, Minneapolis Public Schools special education director, Rochelle Cox, sent a letter to district special ed teachers on June 23.

The letter seeks to clarify MPS’ reasons for altering its popular citywide autism program and comes on the heels of  a month’s worth of mounting pressure–mostly from parents unhappy with the district’s actions. Rochelle Cox

Here’s a brief timeline of events regarding changes to the citywide autism program, which provides intensive autism support for students, along with access to mainstream classrooms:

    • May 21: Many autism program parents and teachers first learn of MPS’ plans regarding the citywide autism program. These plans include directing more autism students into regular ed classrooms in their neighborhood schools, and out of the specialized autism programs at various sites throughout the district. Parents say they only found out about these changes through word of mouth. They say there has been no official announcement or communication from MPS.
    • May 22:  Parents push for a meeting at Burroughs Elementary, which has citywide autism programming. Special ed administrators Rochelle Cox and Amy Johnson–both of them new to their jobs–are in attendance. Parents say they expressed deep concern over MPS’ move to discontinue citywide programming by “starving the programs” out (and not informing incoming kindergarten parents that the programs even exist). The gist of the parents’ views? Gratitude for the “centralized resource of staff with Autism Spectrum Disorder expertise”  they have found in the citywide program. This conflicts with MPS administrators claim that families are asking for their children to be sent to neighborhood schools.
    • End of May–Early June: Parents pepper school board members and district administrators with impassioned appeals for, if nothing else, a pause in the district’s efforts to restructure the citywide autism program. 
    • June 9: KARE 11 news station erroneously reports that the Minneapolis school board voted to approve changes to the autism program. The Minneapolis Star Tribune then picked up the story. It was false. Further confusion and frustration ensues for those following this story.
    • June 9-22: Various local media outlets touched on MPS’ plans, with varying levels of context and insight. On June 22, the Minneapolis Star Tribune publishes a short article about the issue, and focused it primarily on parent reaction to MPS’ plans. Also on June 22, WCCO news does an overview of the situation, featuring Rochelle Cox’s arguments in favor of the changes: 

  • Week of June 22: I write a few blog posts about all of this. (Hint: You are reading one of them!)
  • June 22: Minneapolis parents put together a Change.org petition and call it “Preserve the Rights of Students with Autism.” It has over 800 signatures as of June 25.
  • June 23: MPS spins out some damage control via special ed administrator Rochelle Cox’s letter to Minneapolis special ed teachers.

Here is a snapshot of Cox’s letter, which was forwarded to me:

I would like to provide updates and clarifications regarding changes to our autism program for next year. As we move to strengthen our capacity to serve more students with autism in their community schools, some resources from Autism Citywide Programs have been shifted to provide special education services to students with autism in their community school.

In order to “strengthen our capacity to serve more students with autism in their community schools,” MPS will be closing some specialized autism classrooms and laying off experienced teachers and assistants. 

Rochelle Cox's June 23 letter
Rochelle Cox’s June 23 letter

 

But, the good news is, according to Cox’s letter, MPS will be hiring “3 autism itinerant teachers” who will be tasked with supporting “students with autism at community schools.” 

I am no autism expert, but “itinerant autism teacher” doesn’t quite jibe with what I do know. (I am picturing a child with autism being asked to “hold that meltdown” while an itinerant teacher rushes across the city to help.)

Never fear. Cox has got this:

As you know, having students receive their special education services in the general education setting benefits both students with and without disabilities.  Inclusion provides opportunities for both non disabled youth and youth with disabilities to navigate childhood together, supported by adults who create space for children to learn and grow together.

Sounds wonderful. Does this mean MPS will also be lowering class sizes across the district and hiring a bevy of experienced assistants who will be trained in not just “special ed,” but autism, in order to bring about this “learning and growing together” thing?

Minneapolis parent Nikki Fortuin (and not Anne Ursu, as originally posted), who has been vocal about her objections to the proposed changes, has another approach to suggest (bold font is Fortuin’s):

Why not a pilot?

My understanding is that the first discussions regarding this plan took place in December. All of the district leadership people implementing this change are new to their position, having taken their positions within the past year. Why are people new to their positions leading a major rollout in August without consulting with stakeholders first? 

In a letter to school board members and district administrators, Fortuin also called out the lack of the frequently touted “stakeholder input”:

Why not listen to the parents and teachers in the trenches? 

Every parent I have met with a child in the Citywide Autism Program is grateful the program exists. I’m sure the staff must appreciate the ability to consult with and support one another in the program schools. Why is new leadership at the district trying to reinvent the wheel? PARENTS ARE HAPPY WITH THE CITYWIDE AUTISM PROGRAM! IT WORKS!! KEEP IT!! 

Ah, well. Not to worry. Cox’s letter ends on a happy, welcoming note: 
 
Please don’t hesitate to ask questions. We also plan on providing more information when you return from summer break. 
Have a fun and restful summer!

Will Minneapolis’ “Best Inclusive Special Ed Program” No Longer Exist?

As Minneapolis Public Schools administrators move to dismantle the district’s popular citywide autism program, parents of current and future autism program students are fighting back.

A brief article by the Minneapolis Star Tribune on June 22 tapped into the brewing discontent over MPS’ plans for the citywide program, which involves sending “level 1 and 2” autistic students (considered higher functioning by the district) to their neighborhood schools rather than to autism-focused sites throughout the city.

The district says this move is about providing more “resources” to neighborhood schools, and about mainstreaming special ed students.

But a group of Minneapolis parents with kids in the autism program are not buying these arguments, and in the last 48 hours they’ve gotten active, putting together a Change.org petitionintended to “preserve the rights of students with autism”–and sending out a press release outlining their complaints. 

The press release was sent via email by Emily Goldberg, whose five-year old twin boys are students in the citywide autism program. It does not mince words. Calling MPS’ stated reasons for taking apart the program nothing more than “rhetoric,”  the parent-crafted document offers a blistering critique of the district’s stance.

Here’s a look at the press release, called “Rhetoric vs. Reality” and signed by over 30 parents (bold type and font color are part of the document):

  1. The District Says: Our new plan will allow more inclusion.The Truth Is: The autism program is already inclusive. It is arguably the best inclusive special education program in Minneapolis Public Schools and is currently recognized statewide for its inclusion and successful education of students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The ASD licensed teachers and ASD trained staff give students the support they need to function in a mainstream environment. Teachers say the Citywide Autism Program also allows more inclusion opportunities for (Federal Setting III) students than they will have in the new plan.  

    The change the district is making will put more students with ASD on the caseloads of resource teachers (SERTs) who do not have knowledge of and expertise with ASD; the job does not require them to have the training to know how to educate and support these students. Without proper support, many students will fail academically, behaviorally, socially and emotionally—and will need to spend more time in special education settings.

  2. The District Says: The autism program is not being closed. We only closed three classrooms to fund supports in neighborhood schools. The Truth Is: It is effectively being dismantled. In addition to officially shutting down three classrooms, the district also quietly closed off several more program sites to incoming students this year, with the clear intention of starving out those sites. Teachers have been ordered to remove all references to the Citywide Autism Program from the adaptations specified in current students’ IEPs. The program was designed to serve students…who required a high level of support by staff who have expertise and knowledge in Evidence Based Interventions; now, it will no longer be available to the majority of kids it was built for. (Higher needs) students no longer have access to modeling and increased inclusion opportunities, and some will be served in classrooms with kids of other disabilities and lose their individualized support.
  3. The District Says: This is not about budget cutting.The Truth Is: There is no other rational explanation for these changes. Or if there is one, no one from the district has shared it or consulted with teachers and families. How much money will the district save in five years when there are no Federal Setting I & II students left in the program and the majority of current Autism Program site schools are closed down?

    Why is the district cutting access to early childhood ASD classrooms and raising caseloads from 6 students with ASD to 8 students with ASD in a classroom? Providing intensive interventions when children are young can improve the prognosis for when they get older. Many of the autistic behaviors can decrease or cease. Increasing caseloads to 8 will make it almost impossible to meet the individual needs of the students and turn this essential service into a day care. What reason for that is there besides budget?

Other areas of dispute are outlined in the letter, such as push back against the district’s classification of some students as “mildly autistic.” There is no such thing, the parents say:

Even kids who appear to function fairly well in the classroom much of the time can have violent outbursts, severe sensory deregulations and debilitating anxiety issues. They may sit quietly in the classroom but not learn. Sometimes kids’ classroom behavior is affected for minutes, other times for months. Their needs can change on a dime, and can be hard to identify without ASD knowledge and training. These children need special education services (Evidence Based Interventions) specifically tailored to the characteristics and needs of students on the Autism Spectrum. This is why the Citywide Autism Program exists.

The letter ends on a cautionary note, and with a plea for reconsideration from Minneapolis officials:

We…foresee disruption for general education students, and school-wide frustration for general and special education staff across the district. We predict this will lead to many students and staff leaving the district for greener educational pastures, while the children of families with less means will be left behind to fail.

We urge the district to keep all of its students’ best interests at heart. Please put a halt to this hastily implemented plan that will not serve anyone well. All of our city’s children deserve better.

Minneapolis Public Schools administrators, the ball is now in your court.

Shell Game? Minneapolis Public Schools to dismantle citywide autism program

I like waking up to a good Twitter exchange, especially when it concerns one of my favorite subjects: the Minneapolis Public Schools. 

This morning, the Tweet that started it all was a shout out to Minneapolis Star Tribune education reporter Alejandra Matos, who did a wee bit of poking into Minneapolis’s recent “family friendly” decision to stop providing its well-regarded citywide autism program:

“A little more deeply” is right, but it’s a start. 

Minneapolis has been offering a citywide autism program for years, where kids with autism get access to regular classroom experiences and the best of the best autism services, with real deal teachers trained in working with autistic kids. Here is how Matos describes it:

In the program, about four or five autistic students are assigned to a classroom with a specialized autism teacher, assistant teachers and aides. The children are also assigned to a mainstream classroom led by a teacher with experience teaching students with autism. The students often stay together from kindergarten to fifth grade.

Parents love it, apparently, with one even referring to it as a “gem” that the district “should be showing off.” And so the district is dismantling it.  For the kids’ sake, of course:

District officials say they want to free up more resources to serve students in their community schools, and federal law requires the district to serve students in the least restrictive way possible. They say the change will allow more inclusion into mainstream classrooms across all schools.

But parents say their kids have always had the option of inclusion and mainstreaming, as well as the option to send their kids–autistic or not–to their community school. Now, the difference is they won’t have the option of citywide, intensive programming staffed with autism-trained teachers and assistants.

Whatevs. Minneapolis Public Schools “Chief Academic Officer” Susanne Ziebart Griffin doesn’t really need parental or school board input anyway:

“I acknowledge parents’ concerns,” said chief academic officer Susanne Griffin. “These are their children. They want the best for them.” Griffin said that decisions to close classrooms are made all the time. “This is not uncommon.” The district does not need a board vote to make these changes because it is not a matter of policy.

Griffin had me at: “This is not uncommon.”  But not everyone is buying this blithe little brush off:     

Ow. “A shell game with services at the expense of students’ education rights.” 

That sounds like something worth digging into, a lot more deeply.