Rep. Scharnhorst discusses Bryce's Law

Missouri Education: In need of reform

The need for autism education reform in Missouri (Part 2)

The need for autism education reform in Missouri

Taking Giant Steps

From the St. Louis PD Letters 3/20/08

Ulterior motives

I am the parent of an autistic child, and I oppose the proposed tax credit programs for the parents of autistic children. I oppose this legislation because I believe some of the people behind it have ulterior motives.

The nonprofit group pushing this legislation, the Children's Education Council of Missouri, is just another of many "school choice" organizations that are political fronts for the religious right. Jason Crowell, who authored Senate Bill 993, and House Speaker Rod Jetton, who pushed House Bill 186, both have strong political ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, the Missouri Baptist Convention and other religious groups that are hostile to public education. Most informed people know that helping the families of autistic children has little to do with these bills.

Nora Kelleher, who wrote "Special needs students will benefit from new tax credit program" (March 11), a commentary supporting the legislation, was identified as a development officer for Giant Steps of St. Louis. Her job is to raise money for Giant Steps of St. Louis; but at least she's honest about her agenda.

David W. Johnson | Overland

The author of this op-ed demonstrates that many parents ARE well-served by their public schools. The idea that the movement for more school choice, especially for special needs children is either a front for the so-called “religious right” or that Giant Steps’ interest is money. It’s an easy enough subterfuge, but considering I’m a left-leaning Democrat who thinks HB 1886 makes sense and has an excellent chance of making a difference in the lives of many families whose children aren’t getting what they need.

I believe that Giant Steps’ priority is helping special needs children, not making money, or else their founders would have created Giant Steps Bank or Giant Steps Real Estate.

But what about the parents who use Giant Steps?

Shari Kaminsky’s child is at Giant Steps, and believes the tuition tax credit will help families like her, and why.

"I hope that because of hearings like this, more people will begin to take notice of what's happening to the children falling through the cracks of the school system," said Shari Kaminsky, a mother of two autistic children from Kirkwood who testified before the committee.

Kaminsky's older son has done well in the special public school district, a government entity organized to deliver educational services to special-needs students. But she removed her younger son when she observed the system was not serving his needs. Since enrolling him last autumn at the private program Giant Steps, she has witnessed marked progress in his verbal and social skills.

But the Kirkwood mother said Giant Steps faces declining enrollment as special school districts have stopped establishing new contracts with private providers.

"Unless there is some degree of choice here, it means there will be no Giant Steps," Kaminsky said.

Representatives Need to Be Educated

This week, I arranged a coffee date with my state representative and three other parents about special needs legislation for Missouri. Bryce's Law, as it is known as, is great legislation that has seen tremendous success in other states. Unfortunately, I have read some disturbing articles that do not tell the truth about it. The opponents of this bill either have been brainwashed, do not know about it, or have never been in the shoes of a parent like myself. I am a proud parent of a 5 year old little girl who has autism. She is very sweet and bright, but needs some extra guidance and services. She has an IEP, however, the school she goes to does not only not give her everything promised on her IEP; they also do not have the potential to give her what she needs. The school is just not equipped for it.

However, there are no other schools that we can afford. I can say all of this for many other parents across the state I have spoken with. This brings me to my meeting with our state rep. He seemed unsure of how he would vote on this matter, although at the end of the discussion, I think he had realized this legislation is needed, worthwhile, and would not only help the children but also the public schools. First off, he was afraid it would drain money from the public schools. Actually, it would help public schools because it could take a child who may be very expensive to educate and place them in a school that can do a better job. It will not cost anything as the scholarships are paid for by private donors. In fact, in Florida, they have seen savings of millions of dollars because of this program.

Secondly, he was afraid children without special needs could somehow sneak into the program. I explained to him this would not happen because only children with IEPs are eligible for the scholarships. As any parent knows who has been through the IEP process, it is not an easy task to get one.

Finally, he was concerned that if the state were somehow involved with paying for children to attend private schools, the government would be able to start controlling those private schools. I assured him this was not possible!

After the coffee, he told me he had learned so many things that he did not know before. He was quite grateful to have had the opportunity to speak with us and grateful he learned the truth. Then, he promised me a yes vote! Now, if any other parents can meet with your legislators, please do. The time is now to make sure this passes. Even if you do not have special needs children, show your support. This program will not cost taxpayers anything...unless they decide the donate to the program. It is a win-win situation!

What Missouri's constitution says

One thing I’ve been wondering about is the state’s language guaranteeing a “free and appropriate public education” for all Missouri elementary and secondary school-aged children.

Perhaps a constitutional scholar or lawyer will answer this for me. The language (that I find quite lyrical) is as follows:

A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the general assembly shall establish and maintain free public schools for the gratuitous instruction of all persons in this state within ages not in excess of twenty-one years as prescribed by law.

I’d take issue with the idea that intelligence can be diffused, or spread over the population, because intelligence is inherent (to an extent) and independent of learning. We can measure a child’s IQ at a very early age, and even though we may see that fluctuate throughout someone’s life it is not a thing that can be “imparted” to a child through a series of verifiable tactics. As I understand it, intelligence is just one of many characteristics that influence academic achievement, and the correlation is not necessarily strong!

Children with higher IQs tend to perform better on tests, but The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns says that IQ only accounts for 25% of a given variance in test scores, suggesting that there are other factors at work that are more significant. We see that phenomenon clearly with many autistic children who have very high IQs but aren’t able to retain new information or express themselves.

At any rate, I’ll concede that a “general diffusion of knowledge” is essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people. We have to know our rights in order to defend them, we have to be skilled and learn a body of knowledge to be able to pursue our life and our happiness as well. I’m sure there are cases where that isn’t true, but certainly to simply provide for one’s self a minimum amount of education is needed.

We talk about a “free and appropriate public education” as something that only public schools can offer, but I don’t think that is necessarily true. I think that the obligation to provide knowledge is paramount to the obligation to maintain public schools as we know them. We have, since the inception of the public school system, relied on it to provide that, and upon discovering time and time again that it does not, and that our efforts to improve it aren’t working and are leaving children behind, to camps emerged: those who feel our primary duty is to the public schools at any and all costs, and those who feel our primary duty is to educate and diffuse knowledge.

Tonight I’m watching Gattica, a Gore Vidal adaptation about genetic mapping and predestination—a very disturbing look at chance and editing out “bad” genes, and about the possibility of discrimination based on genetics more than race or social status. A scary thought, indeed, though the story is old—but the moral says that your possibilities are not limited by any definition, disability or restriction. We do have the opportunity to give every child a chance—and a bigger one even than they may be born with, but it will take a leap of faith, and a look at education as a general diffusion of opportunity. The more choices we offer our diverse and unique children, the more knowledge and skills we can offer to all.