PARENTS PLEASE READ AND SHARE! This includes my original email to our State Superintendent, her ridiculous form letter/reply, and my final reply to her. She never did email me back and thats why Im posting. She doesnt care about our children, Oklahoma! Sorry its so lengthy. Dear Dr. Barresi, Thank you for your reply. In your reply you state, The intent of RSA is for all Oklahoma students to have early reading intervention, which is more effective than late remediation. The intent of RSA is also to give children enough time and the correct intervention for the student to read. Research indicates that with enough time and the correct intervention, 95-98% of our students will read on grade level. My child has received intense reading intervention in school since she was in first grade. She has been tutored outside of school since the first grade. And we have spent thousands of dollars in eye therapy since 1st grade. Your statistic does nothing to reassure me that my child will read on grade level by the end of this year. Regardless of how hard we have worked, my child will be the 5% that does not & it is NO ONES fault or lack of trying. I think unfortunately, there just happens to be some children that will be unintentionally harmed by this bill as it is written. I do believe this law can help children. But not every child fits into that box, such as my daughter Chrissy. Let me explain further. The following is a letter written about her eye disability from her specialist in OKC. Also, theres a link that provides more information about children like Chrissy and how they process what they see. childrensvision/reading.htm. The following is part of Dr. Oliphants diagnosis: To Whom It May Concern: Chrissy Benton has been under our care for Developmental Coordination Disorder, (315.4), Binocular Vision Disorder (368.30), and Accommodation,Paresis Of (367.51), since July 2, 2012. Her most recent exam was October 29, 2013. DIAGNOSIS...(I am not posting this part on Facebook.) Chrissy will attend hourly in-office therapy sessions on a bi-weekly basis. She will have daily home procedures for days she is not in our office. After the ten in-office sessions, Chrissy will be reevaluated by the doctor to determine if more therapy is needed. The average patient requires 30 to 40 in-office sessions to develop the visual skills and apply those skills to their educational work. If our office can be of further assistance, please call The Oliphant Center ol Integrated Learning. (405)751-7727. Sincerely, Samuel C. Oliphant, O.D., F.A.A.0. Jennifer L. Brooks, O.D. SCO/lb Now, to give you more information about my child. First, she has not been retained. She is not an OAAP student. The 6 good clause exemptions do not apply to her from what I can tell. From what I can see about a portfolio, she has to prove she is reading independently on grade level, which she is not due to her eye disability. And it will take more years of intense therapy for her to learn to cope with this disability and read on grade level. In fact, her doctor described exactly what happens to Chrissy as she reads. When she comes to a word she doesnt know, its like putting a new pair of glasses on and your eyes needing to focus. Then move to the next word and you put on a different pair of glasses. Your eyes have to adjust again. And so on for every word she comes across. By the end of the passage, her eyes have tired & she gives up. That is my concern for the end of the year test. Even though she gets frequent breaks, she will still get tired and probably start guessing answers. Then it does not become a true assessment of her reading level. Her IEP allows for these accommodations as of right now: extended time limits, frequent breaks, reduce quantity for quality on tests, peer tutoring, modify grading, read test orally, reduce the length of the test, reduction of reading material, reduce the reading level of the test, minimize written work, limit amount of reading, do not count off for spelling, and breaking assignment into a series of smaller assignments. These are her classroom accommodations used throughout the year, but as you well know, most of these go out the window when she takes the end of the year test. In fact, she is allowed to work one way all throughout the year & then expected to take the same test as regular ed students & take it in a way she is not accustomed to. It makes no sense to me that these children are still expected to pass this test or they cannot move on. You stated in your reply, Also, students on an IEP have specific accommodations in the classroom and these specific accommodations will apply during the administration of the Third Grade OCCT. From your statement, my child should be allowed to have the test read to her. But from what I have been told, that will not be the case. Her classroom accommodations stated in her IEP mostly go out the window. They do nothing to help her pass the test. If she was truly able to follow her IEP, the end of the year test (as all other classroom tests throughout the year are done) would be read to her. Or the alternative examples of work in a portfolio could be read to her. But I have been told that this will not happen. These are a couple of suggestions... 1. Can we as parents provide doctors diagnosis along with the IEP to prevent retention? Maybe provide proof of the intense therapy we are spending the time and money on to help improve our childs reading level. We are not parents that are sitting here doing absolutely nothing to remedy the situation. 2. What about looking at the childs growth? Instead of just looking at their test score? For example, my childs data from her Dibels scores from 2nd grade showed improvement. Her reading Title 1 teacher ran a Pathways of Progress Report. Her scores grew by 84%. She was still considered intensive, however, she was improving. 3. What about the IEP team deciding if retention would be helpful or harmful? I understand in some cases it could be helpful, but as the doctor has said, it will take more time than another year in third grade for my daughter to read on grade level. It could take several years of therapy still. These are just some ideas that I have thought of & will continue to think about more. I just dont want us to take ten steps backward in my childs education. We had a really rough kindergarten year when she was learning to read. Her teacher thought she was just acting out and being bad. The teacher actually told my child this. She was punished daily. We switched schools after that year, had her tested, and a teacher discovered Chrissy was just frustrated due to a disability. Once we started receiving help for her disability, we then needed to repair her self esteem. And she felt frustrated and dumb. It wasnt until last year she started to feel better about herself. After all that she has been through, I dont know how, as a mother, to tell her even though she has worked her tail off, sorry you have to stay in 3rd grade. She will give up. I am just asking for your help. As her mother, I am supposed to protect her. I feel this law, the way it is written now, is not allowing me to protect her. And that I am failing her. I would be glad to meet with you if that would help for us to discuss her case. Thank you again for your time. If you truly want to help children, then I hope you intend to help ALL children (even those that dont fit into the box.) Sincerely, Amy Benton 580-606-1106 On Nov 26, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Janet Barresi wrote: Dear Ms. Benton: Thank you for your email. I understand your concerns about students who have IEPs, and the effect the Reading Sufficiency Act has directly on your daughter. Parents that contact us are usually well informed about their childs education. Since 2005, data shows that the number of third graders unable to read at a third grade reading level has remained at over 30%. These numbers have remained unacceptably high, showing that the state has made no growth or improvement with regard to literacy instruction. As a result of these alarming numbers, the legislature amended the Reading Sufficiency Act to require school districts to retain any third grader who scored an Unsatisfactory on the Reading portion of the Third Grade OCCT. Students scoring at the Unsatisfactory level are typically reading at a first grade level and these are the only students who are at risk of retention. The statute was changed to spur an increased focus on literacy and to ensure that when necessary, every child receives additional, targeted assistance in developing the fundamental skills required to reading. Regarding students with learning disabilities, the Department has received a number of inquiries related to the requirements of the Reading Sufficiency Act and the effect of the law on students with disabilities. Consistent with the intent of the law, implementation of the Reading Sufficiency Act should ensure that all students, including students with disabilities, receive additional support and services required to ensure success. One intended effect of the RSA law is that school districts will identify the needs of students earlier, and implement targeted support services for all students. Retention requirements in the RSA are applicable to all students, regardless of disability status. The special education services received by a student with a disability are meant to ensure a FAPE [34 CFR 300.39(b)(3)(ii)]. FAPE requires that a student be afforded the means to fully and equally engage in the general education curriculum. Importantly, academic success should not be the sole factor in determining eligibility for special education services. Further, FAPE is required regardless of whether a student with a disability has been retained or is advancing from grade to grade [34 CFR 300.101(c)]. The retention requirement of RSA does not function as a penalty to special education students. Rather, the retention requirement is a means to ensure that those students experience academic success in future grades through purposeful intervention. The intent of RSA is for all Oklahoma students to have early reading intervention, which is more effective than late remediation. The intent of RSA is also to give children enough time and the correct intervention for the student to read. Research indicates that with enough time and the correct intervention, 95-98% of our students will read on grade level. A student who scores Unsatisfactory at the end of third grade indicates the student is reading about the range of end of first grade to beginning of second grade span. If this student does not meet one of the six good cause exemptions then this child will benefit with more time and the correct reading intervention. Links on the RSA webpage have many resources for parents and educators. For more information, please go to: ok.gov/sde/reading-sufficiency-act. I have also attached a brochure for your information. I hope this information is helpful to you. I appreciate your commitment to your childs education. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Janet C. Barresi State Superintendent of Public Instruction That response is to my original letter as follows: Dear Dr. Barresi, I am a parent of a struggling 3rd grader who has physical problems (diagnosed by a doctor) that hinder her from reading on grade level. At the end of the year, you expect her to pass the reading test if she intends to go on to the next grade. Even though my child is on an IEP, she will still take the same test as everyone else because you have done away with all modified tests. And yet, she must pass it to go on. She must pass the exact same test that regular students take. What are you doing to my child besides setting her up for failure? Her doctor has even told us another year in 3rd grade will not do her any good. In fact, he said it will cause her more harm because she will feel even worse about herself. She shouldnt feel badly about herself.. You see, she was born with this disability. The reason for being behind is not because she hasnt tried, or because her teachers didnt work with her. It isnt because her parents dont work with her. Approximately 3 hours a day at school are spent on reading with half of that time being one-on-one instruction. At home, we spend about 2 hours a night helping her with homework & we have spent thousands of dollars on eye therapy to help with her disability. Even though she is improving, she will not magically be cured by the end of third grade. In fact, her doctor says it could take several more years. So essentially, my daughter doesnt stand at chance at your test. She already feels badly about herself now as it is. And when she cant go onto 4th because of what you have imposed, I will be the one who has to pick up the pieces. I wish you would be the one who had look her in the face and tell her. Just a few weeks ago when her teacher said they would be taking a practice reading test, her special ed teacher had to let me talk to her & calm her down . She was panicked and crying over a practice test and she is only an 8 year old child. Ridiculous. Furthermore, do you realize your law is actually unlawful in regards to a child on an IEP? Federal law states that the IEP team has the final say-so in a special ed childs education. Federal law does not say that the OK law has the final say. The last time I checked state law does not trump federal law. Finally, have you really thought this law through? Do you realize that if a child is held back two times that essentially there will be 16 year olds in 7th grade? In other words, there will be 16 year old boys in classes with 13 year old girls. As a parent of a daughter, I am not very keen on that idea. I am writing this to urge you to put our children first & set aside your agenda. If things arent changed, I will do everything I am able to keep you from being re-elected. We as a state are failing our kids. It is time for us to let them know they matter to us. That they are more than just a test score. Sincerely, Amy Benton
Posted on: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 03:10:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015