Here are two dog stories.
Ehlena, a child with cerebral palsy and her service dog, Wonder, navigate the school day together. Wonder, who Ehlena got after friends and family raised money, is quite a dog according to NPR:
Wonder was trained to hit handicapped buttons for her, to open and close doors, to pick up items she dropped, and perhaps most importantly, to stabilize her so that she could make transfers from a chair to a walker, or from a walker to a toilet seat.
And, not surprisingly with skills like those, Wonder is pretty popular at school:
He went to class with Ehlena and to lunch. He was in the staff section of the yearbook. He had his own ID card. He was in the class picture. And, says Ehlena’s mother, the relationship between dog and kid was integrated into the school seamlessly.
But here’s a similar situation in a different school district with a special-needs child and a service dog:
the dog was not permitted to sit with [the child] in class or to go with her to the lunchroom.
[the family] were even required to demonstrate a toilet transfer with adults from the school watching, an experience that [the parent] says was devastating and traumatic for her daughter.
After the 30-day trial, the school returned to its no-dog policy. Although [the dog] is a hypoallergenic breed, the school said among other things that two children and one teacher were allergic to dogs, and that one child had a dog phobia because he had previously been attacked by a dog.
OK, perhaps not everyone is a dog person? Actually, as you can no doubt tell, they are the same dog story. Same child. Same dog. The Supreme Court will hear arguments in this case today (link goes to a great Mark Walsh scene setter). The issue turns on what actions parents can bring under federal disabilities statutes and where the Individuals With Disabilities Act and state processes fit into that scheme. That’s a legal question that reasonable people can disagree about especially in the context of the litigation-heavy IDEA. But the underlying facts and that ethos might be more important in the long run for public education. There are a lot of districts like that second one and they turn parents who could be allies into adversaries. We might ask why? (By the way, it takes cases a while to find their way to the high court, in case you’re wondering Wonder is now apparently enjoying retirement though he will be at the court today).
Erika Christakis, the early childhood expert and former Yale professor speaks out – on the eve of Halloween of course – about her experience at Yale last year.
“I don’t wish to trivialize genuine concerns about cultural and personal representation,” I wrote, in part. “I know that many decent people have proposed guidelines on Halloween costumes from a spirit of avoiding hurt and offense. I laud those goals, in theory, as most of us do. But in practice, I wonder if we should reflect more transparently, as a community, on the consequences of an institutional (which is to say: bureaucratic and administrative) exercise of implied control over college students.”
Some called my email tone-deaf or even racist, but it came from a conviction that young people are more capable than we realize and that the growing tendency to cultivate vulnerability in students carries unacknowledged costs.
There is a lively debate about this idea. I was at a dinner recently with faculty and students of a prominent east coast school and a student affairs dean made the point that declining participation in formal student activities on their campus owes in part to a culture where the 3.3 student who does a bunch of activities feels like they are losing out to the 3.9 student who just keeps their head down and focuses on grades. It’s an interesting point and a real one for some post-graduate paths. So I wonder if what Christakis is talking about is another cost, a lot of students just want to keep their heads down because they feel less agency in today’s statist climate regardless of what they think about the various issues?
Barbara Madeloni, president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, takes a more philosophical approach to wait-listed parents. Rather than denying that there are thousands of parents on those lists, she suggested in a radio interview that those parents need to sacrifice their personal desires for what she sees as a greater good: high-performing traditional public schools in all neighborhoods.“I would ask that person to join us in thinking beyond just your child,” said Madeloni in an interview on WBUR’s Radio Bostonshow. “We are stronger as a community when we think beyond our circle. … As a community together, are we going to be interested in the common good, or are we going to be invested in our individual needs?
This is basically the debate. Except it’s not in practice. That’s because the charter parents and want-to-be charter parents aren’t stupid. They get that parents with means have already exited. Those parents live in places they can afford to live with good public schools or they send their kid to private options. So they – the people who most need good public schools as a matter of social mobility and opportunity for their kids but can’t move to a tony neighborhood or pay for a private school – are being asked to ‘think beyond their circle’ when no one else is. Maybe flip that on its head and ask all the comfortable suburban voters who are against creating more charter schools for underserved Massachusetts kids to think beyond their circle?
This paper looks at the 5th indicator for ESSA accountability systems. First, it should go without saying that 5th Indicator is a fantastic band name, especially for a band that had education players in it. The author thinks chronic absenteeism is a place to go. It’s a key indicator – for adults and kids – in terms of climate.
Google and Gallup look at the computer science pipeline. Buzzy Hettleman on tutoring. James Dyke and Gerard Robinson on the long overdue but hard choices for Richmond, Virginia schools. Jamar Mckneely on a NOLA turnaround.