The thing is, from what it looks like, this kid isn't short bus special, but gimpy special, so Chicago is -required- to meet his needs.. Americans with Disabilities Act and all that.

School am no make me smrt no more. School am make me dum now.

Before I clicked on the article, I thought they were talking about "DelaWHERE?".

FTA: But e-mails sent by Sarah O'Connor, another of Jennings' attorneys...

They'll all stick around for Pudding Day.

How does a district as large as CPS not have a bus for this already? Wouldn't this be just another route?

The kid in the article is special NEEDS, as in physically disabled, not mentally disabled like subby

Ohhh and I love this

"We would encourage the student to remain within the Chicago Public Schools system. We're trying to do everything we can to get him the assistance that he deserves and needs. We encourage the family to remain patient. We are going to find out what happened here."

Google translate version:

"OMFG, please don't leave... we want you here at Chicago Public School System so the Feds and the media will stop crawling up our ass. Please, please don't go... we promise to fulfill that federally mandated requirement now that it's a big farking mess, we really mean it now.

Curious: FTFA: In Joliet, the teen had a special education plan that called for transportation with an aide, as well as a one-on-one aide to help with note-taking and moving him from class to class.

WTF if this is even close to the norm for special ed/special needs we will NEVER get our investment back on this kid.

sorry for your kid but just how many other kids are doing without basic services because of this money pit.

I give you a 1/10 for effort. Be less obvious less time, maybe even work some OBAMA!!!1 into it.

There's two explanations for the "protip" thing.

Either submittard runs a schooldistrict, or he is indeed a tard.

This sounds like it is going to cost me money...

rcain: The kid in the article is special NEEDS, as in physically disabled, not mentally disabled like subby

Here's the trick, rcain.. for the last 10 years.. "special needs' was a term used for the retreads as well as people with physical disabilities.

Damn but I miss the days of calling a duck a duck and a spade a spade.

rcain: The kid in the article is special NEEDS, as in physically disabled, not mentally disabled like subby

Ohhh and I love this

"We would encourage the student to remain within the Chicago Public Schools system. We're trying to do everything we can to get him the assistance that he deserves and needs. We encourage the family to remain patient. We are going to find out what happened here."

Google translate version:

"OMFG, please don't leave... we want you here at Chicago Public School System so the Feds and the media will stop crawling up our ass. Please, please don't go... we promise to fulfill that federally mandated requirement now that it's a big farking mess, we really mean it now.

There's now a Google translation module for government bureaucracy gobbledigook?

I can happily die now....

Rreal:
Damn but I miss the days of calling a duck a duck and a spade a spade.


If you try the spade thing in my neighborhood, you'd better duck.

Rreal: Here's the trick, rcain.. for the last 10 years.. "special needs' was a term used for the retreads as well as people with physical disabilities.

Damn but I miss the days of calling a duck a duck and a spade a spade.

I qualified that with the differentiation, so what was not made clear? And moreover, how was my statement wrong, when you YOURSELF admit that my statement was in fact correct?
You'd have a point if I had just said "special needs" without the qualifier.

People treat you the way you teach them to treat you.

/that said, feel sorry any bullied kid

so the district wins,they don't have to pay for accomodations.

I posted in the wrong thread. Maybe I'm special ed...

spawn73: There's two explanations for the "protip" thing.

Either submittard runs a schooldistrict, or he is indeed a tard.

After reading Fark so often, I have trouble telling the difference.

frankdorson: I'm with Curious on this one. Sounds like something that will suck the funds right out of the district budget leading to an overall decrease in the quality of education.

I know it's mean, but that doesn't make it any less true.

It's Federally mandated, meaning that there are Federal funds available, and they have probably received said funds but misallocated them.

Here's another example of a woman having a kid she can't afford and doesn't want to take care of anyway. While the school district should provide a bus, it's the kid's parents' fault for where he's at today. He if he had parents who gave a damn, he'd probably have a ride.

Oh, and Fenger High? He's LUCKY the bus never came.

Curious: rcain: It's Federally mandated, meaning that there are Federal funds available,

ok, so the district doesn't have to up the local tax base but it's still money from tax payers.

look i don't know the actual physical limitations of this kid compared to his mental abilities and if stephen hawking has taught us anything it's that the two don't always correlate. BUT that said going the extra mile for these kids is mostly a feel good measure and one we might want to re-evaluate given the current financial crunch.

ecmoRandomNumbers: "Least restrictive environment" costs schools millions more than it should.

what he ^ said. let's take another look at these cost/benefit ratios.

I love it.
Lets analyze the cost/benefit ratios of helping get disabled children to school.

We should put it in your capable hands, maybe you can explain it to them? "look kid, I know you want to learn and such, but you're just too much of a gimp and your smarts just aren't worth the money. Can't you get home-schooled or something?"

There's this common theme of anger and resentment towards social welfare.
But when it comes to corporate welfare, more often than not, no one says a word.
Ohhh... ya, except for the outrage when the banks took all that money.
But that was an exception, far outside the norm.

Believe me... the money we spend subsidizing "private" industry far outweighs the money spent on the disabled. There's a reason we were already trillions in debt BEFORE the 2007 crash.
And it's not because of social welfare

Curious: ok, let's try this again and maybe this time without assuming i'm against social welfare and for corporate welfare.

OK, and thank you for asking nicely.

Since we don't have unlimited funds (and won't ever) we have to do cost/benefit for all programs. if we spend X$ per student per year in a school setting and have to add Y$ to that to get the kid to school, move him from class to class and have someone take his notes ... well that's Y$ not spent on library books, smaller classrooms or other things that help a greater number of kids. so perhaps home schooling might be a better option from a cost standpoint.

in this particular case it seems he moved to his aunt's to get out of a bad home situation. he had the bus, aide, whatever where he was. and if you google the new school it's a dangerous place. (new window)

First off, we need to ask, what exactly is being asked for here.

A short-bus and a teachers-aid to spend a few minutes per day with student.

I think it's safe to assume that in any school distract there will be disadvantaged children.
And that it would be necessary to plan for having roughly 1/5 a classroom (8-18) of students per school of disabled students per school at the absolute minimum. We can counter that with a plan that calls for 2 rooms (60-70) students at the maximum.

So, using basic arithmetic, a school district can create an average budget for special needs students that is a cooperative fund derived from all schools within the district. So, the wealthier areas help to subsidize the less wealthy and so on. The Fed, since it has made it a requirement to allow EQUAL OPPORTUNITY... I know... we got bit in the ass by all those liberal judges who ruled that humans should be treated fairly and equally in accordance to our constitutional charter yada yada yada... has a purse to distribute funds to school districts to help pay for the costs of having teacher aids and a short-bus.

Frankly, I've never seen a problem with this. The short-bus goes to about every school. The short-bus is wheelchair accessible and has special seating accommodations. The short-bus is usually thrown in as part of a package by the bussing contractor. A teacher aide is usually a college student working on course credits plus a small (barely above minimum wage) stipend.
In addition t students, adults from the local communities may volunteer their services as well, though that is more the exception in this day and age since the core of those people were "retired" housewives or so called empty-nesters.

It seems this school has done something wrong.
Why is there no short-bus? Why is there no teacher-aid that is there to address "this one person"
Why is there just one person?
Really.
Think about that.

This school defies an arbitrary, but reasonably apportioned statistical average.

For a school to not have any special needs accommodations is highly suspect, since it implies they do not have any other special needs students.

But yet... they received federal and local money. Where did that money go?
And where are their other special needs kids and how are they accommodating them?
And if they do not have any special needs kids, why not?

Fact is, the more kids use the system the more cost effective it becomes since the resources get used to their potential maximum. I think the real issue that needs to come out here is what the hell is going on at this school and why they lack federally mandated requirements.

So with all that said, I hope that you can agree with these things:

a) The provisioning of a short-bus is not that expensive since they already have a bussing system and every bussing contractor has a short-bus offering to add to the package.

b) Teachers-aides are not that expensive and can be used elsewhere in the school for menial tasks and assistance to teachers and administrators throughout the school.

c) It is statistically exceptional for a school to not have any special needs student until the one fateful day they find themselves failing to provide for the one single solitary student who finally needed it.

If you do agree, I think you'd find that there is indeed more to be seen regarding the administration of the school in question.

Anyway, thanks again for having good candor.

Working with Special Education students, I can say there are some beautiful minds in play here and to deny them access to education is wrong. We all deserve a chance to learn. I admit some students are futile but you have to try....

baddogg: Working with Special Education students, I can say there are some beautiful minds in play here and to deny them access to education is wrong. We all deserve a chance to learn. I admit some students are futile but you have to try....

That's the same reason I post on Fark :)