Good Morning Leah, I'm very glad to hear everything is going fine for you at the elementary level. I wish I could tell you that it is going to stay that way. Ms White is not the spokes person for me, all though I do relate to her as many parents in the upper grades do. Thank you for your opinion, but I do disagree with you and in time you will find out why. One last thing, are you the same Neprud that was involved in Special Ed. here in Duxbury? Perhaps just a relative seeing it's not that common of a name.

Leah,
Your post brought up some old issues, but also some new issues that I have been meaning to address.

Regarding Your Comment in #2: “Special Education is funded and there is not a lack of Special Education”
There is not a single department in our school system, or probably most school systems, that would claim to be adequately funded.
Duxbury’s Special Education Department has been underfunded and under-prioritized for many, many years. I refer you to the Dept. Of Education statistics that I provided in my Post #49. That data shows that between 2000 and 2006, the State averages for “Direct Special Education Expenditures as a Percentage of School Budgets” varied between 16.9% and 19.1%. Duxbury’s averages were way below that at 8.2% to 12.8%. During these same years, Duxbury went from a nearly perfect 2001 DOE Coordinated Program Review to a 2007 Review which documented that Duxbury was only implementing two-thirds of the minimum criteria required by Mass special education law. Also during that time period, we ended up on a federal watch list for poor performance of the special ed group on MCAS testing.

I believe that a significant amount of the school budget deficit this year which has been repeatedly blamed on “increased special ed expenditures” and particularly “higher out-of-district costs” was actually spent on salaries for services that the Duxbury schools needed to start to provide to at least begin an attempt to comply with the minimum standards required by state/federal law.

Regarding Your Comment #2: “My experience has been that when services are necessary and appropriate they are provided”
And
Regarding Your Comment #3: “My experience has been that if a child is found eligible for any service, then that service is recommended, and is provided, period, end of story”
My experience has been just the opposite. As a matter of fact, I filed a complaint with the Dept. of Ed in January with documentation that a service that had been unanimously recommended by my son’s Team was eliminated/refused at a higher administrative level. The initial report from the DOE states that the service was refused because of a lack of staff. Duxbury is lacking the staff member because his hours were cut due to budget cuts. It is illegal to deny the services recommended by a student’s Team because of a lack of space, staff and/or budget. I wonder how many other children in Duxbury have had services and accommodations denied by administrators because of these same illegal excuses.

Regarding You Comment #4: “many times providing services over and above what’s written on the IEP”
I have documentation of hundreds of instances when staff members have not complied with my son’s IEP(special ed plan). I have reports of investigations from the Principal, Administrator of Special Education and Superintendent where each of them determined noncompliance at different point in time. I have six findings of noncompliance from the Dept. Of Education and two open complaints being investigated. I have an open complaint with the Office of Civil Rights with documentation of over a hundred incidents of noncompliance. I have an upcoming Bureau of Special Education Appeals hearing scheduled to address further instances of noncompliance during this school year. And, staff members are still not complying with my son’s IEP. The long term educational neglect of Duxbury’s children with disabilities is just plain morally and ethically wrong. It is time for me to see what a Judge and jury have to say about all of this.

Regarding Your Comment #5:
If the MCAS failures have nothing to do with the staff, administration or services as you claim, then you are saying that the blame lies on the students. According to the Dept. of Ed statistics, over 97% of Duxbury’s special education students have “no intellectual impairment”. That means that 97% of our sped students have the intellectual capacity to pass the MCAS tests. If the services and accommodations that our sped students need are actually being determined, designated and provided, then 97% of our students with disabilities are as intellectually capable of passing the MCAS tests as their non-disabled peers. Yet, Duxbury is on a federal watch list for poor MCAS performance by the special ed sub-group. I totally disagree with your claim that this is not due to staff, administrators or services.

I have not heard a single comment or quote from anyone in Duxbury expressing any level of satisfaction with our MCAS scores in general. I believe that Duxbury’s system-wide poor MCAS performance should not be blamed on the students, in general, because they are almost all intellectually capable. I believe the problem comes down to lack of accountability in the classroom - lack of accountability to comply with the law, lack of accountability to implement special ed plans and lack of accountability to teach the approved curriculum. If teachers are held accountable in Duxbury’s classrooms, then the MCAS scores of all of our intellectually capable students will improve significantly. As we all know, in times of trouble, it is the most vulnerable members of our society and school system, ie the students with disabilities, whose hardship becomes obvious first even though all members are affected to varying degrees.

Sandy White

Ms. White answered the points raised by Ms. Leah so well, not with emotion but with statistics. One thing I would like to add is that Ms. White states that a "significant amount" of the budget deficit was blamed on special education costs. Actually, Ms. Skeiber blamed the entire deficit on special education costs, including transportation costs for special education students.
New:
The posting by Ms. Leah seems to have been taken off this forum, after one of the other posters identified the author as an employee of the school system. This is a public forum, so it's unusual for someone to post a reply and then have it removed by the administrator. It's like buyer's remorse I guess.

So readers, if you're wondering who Leah is that is referred to in the previous postings, and why she's being mentioned, her posting was here in this location, but was pulled out. Luckily, I retained a copy, which I have inserted below:

Message:
"As the parent of a child with special needs, at the elementary level, I can stay quiet no longer. This blog is an insult to those educators who are dedicated to providing the best possible education to the children with special needs. Do they make mistakes? Yes. Have the prior administrations made mistakes? Yes. But, please give those who have been here for many, many years, and those new staff members who are working diligently to educate our children, the credit they deserve. I would like to respond to several points made in the most recent blogs:

1. The residents of Duxbury who have been reading the blogs have been getting a very one sided picture as to what is taking place in the schools. I would like them to know that loulou and Sandy White do not speak for all parents. There are two sides to all the stories. The parents arenʼt always right, nor is the staff, please try to keep all negative comments in perspective, and keep in mind that as human beings nobody is perfect. My experience has been that when I have a question, issue, complaint, if I approach the staff/administration in a civil and respectful manner, I at least get their ear.

2. Special Education is funded, and there is not a lack of Special Education. My experience has been that when services are necessary and appropriate they are provided in a professional, expedient, and compassionate manner.

3. Children are found eligible for Special Education, or not, based on the MA Department of Educationʼs flow sheet. The decision is not an arbitrary one. It is based on the testing results, the diagnosis, and the teamʼs input. True, this hasnʼt always been the case in the past, but whatʼs done is done, and the new administration is running team meetings by the book, and decisions are based on need, not on what the parents want or on what the parents think their child deserves or needs.

3. It is categorically untrue that the Special Education teams do not advocate for students. They do advocate for students, daily, loudly, passionately, and professionally. It is also untrue that if they want to keep their jobs the educators cannot advocate for the students. My experience has been that if the child is found eligible for any service, then that service is recommended, and is provided, period, end of story. I have never been at a meeting where an administrator has urged a therapist to cut back on services secondary to funding.

4. Please do not insinuate that the Special Education professionals are not treating our vulnerable citizens well. They do so on a daily basis, many times providing services over and above whatʼs written on the IEP.

5. The reasons some of the Special Education students have not successfully passed the MCAS has nothing to do with Special Education funding, the competency of those working with the students, the administration, or the lack of services. The students, and the professionals who work with them, have worked tirelessly on improving the skills needed to pass the MCAS. Many of these students have scored in the Needs Improvement range, rather than in the Warning range, and this improvement should be celebrated, not demeaned. Please keep in mind that many of these students are on IEPs because they donʼt have the necessary academic skills to make effective progress in the regular education classroom without specially designed instruction. To then, require them to take a test that their typically educated peers is taking, isnʼt fair, nor does it truly test them against themselves. To speak so negatively about the MCAS scores is an insult to the students and to all those educators
working with them.

Iʼm sorry that there are those of you who have had such negative experiences and I hope for you that you can settle your differences."

A public forum is a great way to encourage discussion, and the employees of the school department should not be afraid of posting their comments, if they aren't subject to retaliation for their thoughts.

1) Let's cut to the chase. Loulou, why don't you stop beating around the bush and ID yourself. Sally White may be off the wall, but at least she signs her name.

2) Forget the lawyers, LL. What other underhanded strategies have you employed or are you employing as we type.

3) Speaking of Ms. White, what happens when parents break the SpEd laws, miss timelines, misspeak at meetings and hearings?

4) Ms. White, are you part of LL's lawsuit or not?

5) Where are the sane people of this town? Ms. White BRAGS about the money she is costing the town, incurring legal fees as she incessantly calls the DOE every other day on some imagined slight or other. Why isn't she trying to cut back on these fees that she and LL, as well as others like them, inflict upon the taxpayers of this community? There are many ways to solve problems without a constant stream of idiotic complaints.

6) What about my children?? We cannot afford a gifted and talented program, for which my children, and many others, are suffering. Please do no SpEd me to death. You 9SW, LL, and others) openly brag about the problems you are causing in this system. Meanwhile, others - anyone not aligned with you and your group - are being penalized!!

Well George, I mean “Smokey”,
If I am so “off the wall” then how come I just received notice today that the Bureau of Special Ed Appeals decided to subpoena the Administrator of Special Ed, the DHS Principal, the DHS school psychologist, the DHS school nurse, the DHS academic tutor, and three DHS teachers to a DOE hearing in Malden on April 9th and 10th? And why did I also receive notice that Program Quality Assurance accepted and opened yet another complaint of violation of education law? If there was really no basis to my complaints as you claim, then do you really think the DOE and PQA and the BSEA would be taking them this seriously?

Sandy White

P.S. If the school attorney charged $2563 for "witness preparation" of four staff members for a "brief interview" during a simple noncompliance investigation on Feb 29th, then just imagine how much money for "witness preparation" she'll be able to bilk out of Duxbury tax payers for a two day hearing with 8 witnesses!!! And all because staff members absolutely refuse be held accountable for implementing the accommodations in a special ed plan in compliance with basic education law - a special ed plan that costs Duxbury tax payers virtually nothing.

Sandy,
Be honest. You subpeonaed them. The school district wanted to make the teachers available via phone interview, however you wanted to "face your accusers". The BSEA allowed your motion to have these individual be present only because they did not have legal precident to order telephonic testimony when both parties did not agree to telephonic testimony. I notice you also ommitted that the BSEA denied your request to have the Superintendent and Guidance Counselors present as their testimony would be irrelevant to your complaint.

Interesting that you mention "you wanted to "face your accusers"". Since I filed for the hearing charging school staff with noncompliance with the law and I am not being "accused" of anything, then what could any of this possibly have to do with me "facing my accusers".
Is that the general attitude of the sped department towards sped parents - do parents feel like they are "facing their accusers" at Team meetings? I certainly have been made to feel that way many times. Now it appears that same strategy is being planned for the upcoming hearing, too.

The school attorney was only able to quash two (Supt. and one guidance counselor) out of eleven of my witnesses, although I am sure she would have preferred to quash all eleven. I'm satisfied that I can make my case with the nine witnesses that will be present. In the meantime, I have received written information via Freedom of Information Act requests that will prove my points without the Superintendent, so she might as well stay in Duxbury. Supt. Skeiber sat through the entire last day of the previous BSEA hearing without saying a word - evidently, she had time back then to take out of her "busy schedule" even though she claims to be "too busy" now.
Sandy White

Since discosows is now claiming to be "honest", I meant to add that I was the one that requested that our hearing be held in Duxbury for the convenience of the staff (just like the last hearing was held in Duxbury. It was the school attorney that requested the telephonic hearing from Malden. Both requests were denied by the hearing officer.

There are only a very limited number of people who could have access to the information in yesterday's BSEA letter that was posted by discocows last night. Those people would be the Superintendent, the Administrator of Education, the school attorney and maybe some of the school committee members. Isn't it interesting that one of those people would choose to start posting anonymously on a public forum?

I assure you I have no affiliation with the Duxbury School system.

Oh yeh, we've heard that too many times before to believe it again.

If your a true dico cow when you go on the dance floor you don't always know who your partner is. Maybe it is SMOKEY THE BEAR or CURIOUS GEORGE.

Good Morning!! Very interesting evening on Wed.

1) Where's LL? No real response!! I'll bet he's working on some issues in the city, if you catch my drift. Maybe he's in NH today. Can you "dig" it?

2) Ms. White, what do you do if a deadline/timeline is missed (inadvertantly or not)? That DOE # is on speed dial, isn't it?
What happens when you miss the same sort of timeline? Have you ever missed a timeline? Have you offered any and all information needed by the schools? Do you reject IEP's just for the hell of it, to continue to tie up the system and fulfill your own self-proclaimed prophecy of driving the district bankrupt thru petty disputes and not-always transparent info? Have you allowed the system and its reps to have full access to info re: your dispute? Up to now, you portray only white hats and black hats, never a shade of gray.

I submit that there's a lot of info you're hiding. Remember, the system has the rights as well, including full disclosure on your part with respect to your child.

3) Ms.White, are you or are you not a major player in LL's projected lawsuit?

4) Unfortunately, this entire mess brought on by LL, SW, & others could turn into an us vs. them, Hatfields vs. McCoys, with SpEd patrents on one side and regular ed/gifted & talented on the other. Duxbury will need years to recover, indeed, if it ever does. The sense of entitlement has to end. Shopping for diagnoses with extra disposable income needs to cease. You want something special - pay for it. That's why you live in "Deluxe-bury" - you can afford to!! Stop holding the rest of the system hostage!!