McHenry County Blog

Yesterday, the first half of a report was published on what happened on the special ed front at the parents advisory committee meeting and the subsequent school board meeting. What follows, concludes that report.

Board member Aileen Seedorf questioned a disbursement to Scholastic Inc. for over fifty thousand dollars in the financial records. Scholastic provides Read 180.

Controller Mark Altmayer didn’t give it up and said he didn’t know.

With some persistence, other administrators fessed up and the cat was out of the bag.

Finally, Supt. Burkey confessed, saying 60 licenses had been purchased.

Curriculum director Mary Olsen said all of these licenses were to be used only for regular education students.

Tough to figure out how no licenses had been purchased a week earlier but we’ll wait for the response to the Freedom of Information request. And, if it’s unsatisfactory, I’ll file it again after January 1st when there will be actual penalties for those responding falsely.

One could still wonder why the Read 180 purchases were in a special ed classroom unpacked by a special ed student and given to a special ed student to take home to his parents.

Apparently at least one special ed student had been using the Read 180 program when none had been purchased for their use.

What the special ed parents asked for at the board meeting was

• Being able to make a presentation to the board on caseload staffing
• Parent participation on the committee coming up with revised ARRA funds spending recommendations

Seedorf tried to get the board and Burkey to agree to schedule a presentation by the parents at the next committee of the whole meeting.

Burkey and the board majority turned cold shoulders to both suggestions.

How unreasonable are such requests, considering how the Special Ed Moms have been treated this fall?

They are very reasonable.

In order to get the superintendent and 158 administrators to listen one apparently has to go door-to-door passing out flyers.

The Daily Herald pointed out how Burkey had “stone ears” in its article and how the parents distributed flyers door-to-door in order to stop this vote and get a revised spending list.

The Northwest Herald observed of the newest revision of how District 158 intends to spend the $1.6 million (which happened after the flyers hit door knobs):

“And the initiative for additional staff development –such as the opportunity to be trained in disability awareness –increased to $450,000 total.”

Parents told the board there had been other items purchased besides Read 180 and there was an internal memo indicating such.

As you might expect, administrators asked for a copy of their own memo, rather than offer to provide the memo to the board with an explanation.

Perhaps the memo has to surface publicly before its existence is confirmed by the administration.

Sort of like how the Read 180 licenses and materials weren’t purchased this year until a special ed parent brought the materials to a board meeting for show and tell.

District 158 is among the model local governments in revealing what will be discussed at their meetings. (In comparison, Crystal Lake reveals nothing more than its agenda and, then, not on a convenient basis.)

But with how it obtained the Read 180 licenses, which it apparently wants to finance with Federal stimulus money and which educational value is clearly experimental for special ed kids, “transparency” apparently means,

“Show us evidence of what you suspect and we’ll admit that’s what it is.”

Thank goodness for observant parents.

And others.

The Huntley School District 158 Board room was packed Thursday at 7 PM.

The only two empty seats were that of Board President Shawn Green and board member Kim Skaja. Skaja showed up after missing the academic spotlight and almost all of the parents’ public comments.  Green was absent, having told me that he would participate by phone if the special education agenda item were to be considered.

The parents’ advisory committee meeting on special ed had started at 6. It received record attendance. (Seen above are some of those who attended the July 14th meeting of the same committee.)

Many special ed teachers were in attendance.

At issue were staffing recommendations that has caseloads close to the legal maximum limit, for example, for speech pathologists in five schools.

The plan proposed by the administration for formal adoption has the burden being placed on individual teachers to prove they have too large of a caseload before adequate staffing is considered to meet the needs of the children.

“Prove it! with you doing all of the work” is apparently Human Resources Chief Lauren Smith’s new idea of working together and “collaborating” with the teachers.

The first item discussed by Special Ed Director Cheryl Kalkirtz was her suggestion to not have a December 10th parents advisory committee meeting.

She asked for a show of hands of those favoring not having the meeting.

The only hands raised were the administrators’.

When then asked how many wanted to have the meeting, a roomful of hands went up.

The attempt to gain approval to cancel the meeting at which the Federal stimulus ARRA IDEA spending would be discussed with parents failed. Apparently, their kids education was considered more important than Christmas parties.

One parent in 158, who is a special ed teacher in another district, made this point about the reading programs proposed to be financed with Federal funds:

“What are we doing to make sure it’s being implemented properly?”

When Kalkirtz seemed to try to brush off the point, wanting to move onto a different topic, a Special Ed Mom from the back of the room spoke up:

“I don’t think you heard what she was saying!”

It was fairly obvious from comments made by some of the teachers that this may have been the only time all of these teachers were in a room and asked or allowed to voice their opinions and ask questions about how the $1.6 million dollars should be spent.

It certainly did not appear that administrators had asked the teachers for their input on the revised list of expenditures.

Strange that teachers may have to attend public meetings if they want to “collaborate” with administrators on a group basis. Wouldn’t you think that would be included in the union contract?

Parents learned that, contrary to what Supt. John Burkey said at the previous board meeting, 60 Read 180 licenses had already been purchased for Heineman school. (When Burkey challenged a Special Ed Mom to file a Freedom of Information request on the topic the Thursday before last, I did. I’ll let you know when I get the response.)

The Moms knew this because, apparently as part of class time, a special ed student was assigned to unpack the boxes which were stacked up in a special ed room.

In addition, a special ed student received the Read 180 materials to take home so the parents could see what was going to be used for that student.

More tomorrow.

Yesterday, McHenry County Blog began a rather exhaustive report on Thursday night’s meeting of the Huntley School District 158 school board meeting on how to spend Federal Stimulus money earmarked for special education.

Today we continue the comments made by Special Ed Moms.

The plan would “continue to keep the district out of compliance,” Sara Deifucci charged.

“The district is so sensitive when it comes to regular students. It seems insensitive to special (needs) students.”

There was also this intriguing question:

“Has the district already purchased anything that parents aren’t aware of? Have you already purchased Read 180 licenses?”

“No,”

Superintendent John Burkey replied.

“If I FOI it, (will I find something)?”

“Do your FOIA (short for Freedom of Information request),” he said.

Past shyness was shed as one after another they worked up courage to speak in public about what they saw as poor judgment concerning where the money was to be spent.

Those with probing questions trained their sights on a computer assisted reading program called Read 180.

It is a program that is aimed at junior high kids. Late in the discussion it was reported that pilot program for sixty students had been conducted, but none of the students were special ed children. They were low level readers and, from the recommendation to roll out the program more widely, it must have been successful.

“It’s failed iin other districts,” another Mom said. She said her son, who has an Individual Education Plan (IEP) had told her he was going to start Read 180.

“Keep my son out of those things until it’s in his IEP,” she said firmly.

This mother even seems to have made the jump into political arena.

“We made choices by putting you in this spot. I wish I had gotten involved earlier.”

Huntley School District 158 Special Ed Moms poured in on during the public comment time before the school board Committee of the Whole meeting Thursday night.

By the time that part of the meeting was over at 11:15, there was no clear consensus among board members to approve the plan as presented. More detail was requested.

The Moms probably weren’t just irritated that the meeting started forty-five minutes late as a result of the board’s decision to expel a student for unspecified reasons.

They had done their homework, made possible by the school board’s having posted its board packet on the internet.

One after another they attacked various parts of the plan to spend Federal Stimulus money coming to help children with special needs.

There was a complaint that the gathering of information from staff and parents was inadequately promoted

One Mom took on the use of $80,000 for what seemed to be routine furniture purchases.

Another attacked Read 180:

“We don’t know this program will work for our kids.”

Taking up 43% of the $830,000 to be spent this year, “We don’t have any studies showing it will work on special needs students.”

Concerning staff development:

“I’m not really seeing that here.”

“It’s very tech heavy.”

“There are a lot of items that are very questionable.”

There was a toilet seat included.

“If we need that, we need that.”

In other words, why wait for Federal money to buy it?

“I don’t think the messages from the town hall came through on this list.”

More tomorrow.

We would like to think government employees wouldn’t take money away from special ed children and use it for regular education.

Especially when money is specifically designated for special ed use.

Even if the Federal law allows such a diversion (which it does—half can be diverted).

We’d also like to think elected officials wouldn’t allow such an abuse when brought to their attention.

Then there’s what is going on in Huntley District 158.

I wonder if it would be if school administrators or board members have a special needs child.

Board member Aileen Seedorf seems to understand the long standing law which says the district is required to provide an appropriate education to every child. At the July 14th town hall-style meeting, School Board member Shawn Green did express what I took to be sincere concern about how the Federal stimulus money on special education would be spent.

I have written about how the administrators have proposed how to spend the Federal Stimulus funds.

A lot of the money is still being recommended to expand a reading program used in regular ed which the special ed parents don’t want.

The moms and dads don’t want it because there is no vendor-independent research that shows it works with special ed children.

The attention spans required for the programmed instruction are about 20 to 30 minutes. That’s a long time for challenged kids.

It seems likely that the massive expenditure will be redeployed into regular student use when it becomes obvious that the program doesn’t provide much benefit tospecial ed students.

The special ed parents want programs that will work for their children.

From what I heard at the July 14th town hall-style meeting with administrators and school board members, those parents would give those decision-makers the old grade of “needs improvement.”

It would take quite a reporter to capture their disillusionment.  I surely am not skilled enough to convey it.

But, it is clear to me that administrators need to listen to the parents of special education children and not spend a huge sum on a reading program the parents don’t want and for which the parents can find no credible research that says will work.

I remember the education I received from a District 300 mother back in the 1970’s when special education laws were being crafted.  I remember her every time I drive past her Huntley Road home on the way to Spring Hill Mall.  She said to finance her son’s education at Summit School, they had subdivided their property and would sell of the lots.

Unfortunately, most of the parents with special ed kids in Huntley School District 158 don’t have similar resources.  If the Huntley School Board doesn’t provide for their children’s education, ones who might be able to cope in society will just “slip through the cracks,” as the trite cliche says.

It’s really much more serious than that.

Ask a parent.

At Tuesday night’s meeting of neighbors at Rick and Ernstiena Clark’s home on Meridian Street, newly-elected Village President Erin Smith told the upwards of 30 people gathered that Lakewood has been approved for a grant of about $330,000 to complete the relining of the sanitary sewer project on the east side of the village.

This pertains to the water headed to the Crystal Lake Waste Treatment Plant in Country Club Additions between the lake and the Crystal Lake Country Club.

I asked the village staff for details and here they are, compliments of Finance Director Carole Robertson:

The Village of Lakewood has applied for a Water Pollution Control Loan through the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) for $310,000 for relining of sanitary sewer and the rehabilitation of manholes on the east side of the Village to minimize inflow and infiltration into the sanitary sewer system.

The current sanitary sewer system in this area is over 70 years old and does not operate as intended due to excessive infiltration and exfiltration.

Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the IEPA may issue the Loan at zero percent (0%) interest and forgive $77,500 of principal (25% of the loan amount).

Bids will be opened on November 3rd with work to begin a week afterward. Work will most likely continue into spring 2010.

Ironically, the sewers were originally installed through Works Progress Administration. For those whose Great Depression history is a bit weak, the WPA put people to work during the 1930’s.