Federal law mandates a commission of relevant school resources applicable to the needs of students with special education requirements.
It takes a village.
One plus one should equal two.
The national nonprofit group Council for Exceptional Children conducted a survey earlier this year that should intensely interest all K-12 educators, school regulators, parents and others who logically care about educational quality and delivery.
When it comes to funding for special education and California’s students with disabilities, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legions of lawmakers spanning the state agree … to disagree.
Things aren’t uniformly positive when it comes to blurred lines. Blurriness is often linked to a lack of clarity and standards that are more amorphous than workable.
We imagine that many readers of our California special education blog at Steven A. Greenburg in Santa Cruz had one or more teachers that they remember with fondness and deep gratitude. A former student’s feelings of thankfulness for quality teaching often endure for decades and even a lifetime.
San Diego State Assistant Professor Jessica Suhrheinrich refers to a “misconception” she views as being apparent in the realm of special education. Namely, that is the widely held view that a skilled teacher can forge optimal classroom outcomes after receiving and subsequently applying “some initial training.”
State and federal laws mandate that American children with learning and other disabilities have a right to a meaningful education. That is as it should be, of course, and pro-child/pro-parent special education attorneys often deem it their privileged life’s work to fully promote that crucially important interest.
Readers of our Santa Cruz special education blog at Steven A. Greenburg might reasonably believe that California officials can instantly shut down a nonpublic school when it has unquestionably compromised a child’s safety or health.