Parents want hearing school to get state funding

faire_jour said:
The parents in general want it to pass, not this specific family. Their child is mainstreaming and they are happy.
Click to expand...

No where does the article say that. You really have no idea how many parents are supporting the petition to have Clarke put on the APS, because it doesn't provide a count. And the fact still remains that the Dept. of Ed has already stated that they will not be putting Clarke on the APS list because funding is not available, and it would result in cutting services to children that are already being served in the system.
 
jillio said:
Yes, FJ, everyone is always wrong except you. No where does it say that anyone is "thrilled" that she is mainstreamed.

Go back and read the rest of my post. It will clarify the issue for you.
Click to expand...

I highlighted the parts you must have misunderstood...
 
jillio said:
No where does the article say that. You really have no idea how many parents are supporting the petition to have Clarke put on the APS, because it doesn't provide a count. And the fact still remains that the Dept. of Ed has already stated that they will not be putting Clarke on the APS list because funding is not available, and it would result in cutting services to children that are already being served in the system.
Click to expand...

"Parents at the school have launched a campaign to get the school APS status, stating that with only one state-supported oral and auditory school (the DePaul School for Hearing in Pittsburgh), parents in the eastern part of the state are not being supplied a viable choice, said Treacy Henry, regional development director for the Clarke School."
 
faire_jour said:
"Parents at the school have launched a campaign to get the school APS status, stating that with only one state-supported oral and auditory school (the DePaul School for Hearing in Pittsburgh), parents in the eastern part of the state are not being supplied a viable choice, said Treacy Henry, regional development director for the Clarke School."
Click to expand...

How many parents, FJ? That could mean 2 or 20. You are assumming far too much.
 
jillio said:
How many parents, FJ? That could mean 2 or 20. You are assumming far too much.
Click to expand...

I didn't say a number, what are you talking about?? I said that the other parents at Clarke want it changed, which is exactly what the article says. What am I assuming?
 
faire_jour said:
I didn't say a number, what are you talking about?? I said that the other parents at Clarke want it changed, which is exactly what the article says. What am I assuming?
Click to expand...

Theother parents implies that all the parents are behind the petition. Some other parents is accurrate, because in fact, we don't know if it is 2 or 20. For some reason, the article only quotes one. Therefore, you can assume that there aren't many available to add their support in print.

Now, can you get vack to the issue at hand and stop all this silliness? Services are available, and the parents do not need to have private placement paid for.
 
jillio said:
There is a great deal of misunderstanding occurring here, but it is not on my side of the fence.:cool2:
Click to expand...

You were the one who thought the parents were fighting to keep their child at Clarke and have the state pay for it. Clearly, that was you misunderstanding the entire article.

But go ahead, since you don't have any vaild points left, start using the stupid smilies and acting like I'm an idiot. That's how you mangage to get every thread someone dares disagree with you in, closed. You have nothing left to say or spin, you were wrong, so you changed your position and now the childish behavior starts...
 
faire_jour said:
You were the one who thought the parents were fighting to keep their child at Clarke and have the state pay for it. Clearly, that was you misunderstanding the entire article.

But go ahead, since you don't have any vaild points left, start using the stupid smilies and acting like I'm an idiot. That's how you mangage to get every thread someone dares disagree with you in, closed. You have nothing left to say or spin, you were wrong, so you changed your position and now the childish behavior starts...
Click to expand...

Get over yourself, FJ, and get back to the issue. The parents do not need to have private placement paid for with taxpayer money when there are services already available for their oral children.
 
jillio said:
Theother parents implies that all the parents are behind the petition. Some other parents is accurrate, because in fact, we don't know if it is 2 or 20. For some reason, the article only quotes one. Therefore, you can assume that there aren't many available to add their support in print.

Now, can you get vack to the issue at hand and stop all this silliness? Services are available, and the parents do not need to have private placement paid for.
Click to expand...

Actually, the article talks to two families.

Sometimes private placements are appropriate and should and are paid for by school districts.
 
So what make this private oral school different from the other private oral school (the one that is covered by the district)?
 
faire_jour said:
Actually, the article talks to two families.

Sometimes private placements are appropriate and should and are paid for by school districts.
Click to expand...

Like I said, 2 or 20. It isn't stated how many are supporting the petition.

This parent, these parents, those parents, no parent, has the right to demand that taxpayer money go to fund a private placement option when other options for providing services are already available. Period. That is what this case is about. Not what might happen in another district where available services are not the same.
 
Wirelessly posted

A said:
So what make this private oral school different from the other private oral school (the one that is covered by the district)?
Click to expand...

The one that is covered is on the other side of the state, hundreds of miles away. the parents just one in their area covered as well.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



The one that is covered is on the other side of the state, hundreds of miles away. the parents just one in their area covered as well.
Click to expand...

That is because services are provided in this area by the public school system. In the other area of the state, they are not. Big difference.
 
Wirelessly posted

jillio said:
faire_jour said:
Actually, the article talks to two families.

Sometimes private placements are appropriate and should and are paid for by school districts.
Click to expand...

Like I said, 2 or 20. It isn't stated how many are supporting the petition.

This parent, these parents, those parents, no parent, has the right to demand that taxpayer money go to fund a private placement option when other options for providing services are already available. Period. That is what this case is about. Not what might happen in another district where available services are not the same.
Click to expand...

And why do you assume that an appropriate placement *is* available someplace else? it is clear that there are places in the us where no program exsists that is appropriate for oral deaf kids other than a private school, that is why the districts pay the tution. why do you assume that this is not one of those situations?
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



And why do you assume that an appropriate placement *is* available someplace else? it is clear that there are places in the us where no program exsists that is appropriate for oral deaf kids other than a private school, that is why the districts pay the tution. why do you assume that this is not one of those situations?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Placement is available in this area. At the public school.

Why are you repeating what I have been saying?
 
faire_jour said:
And why do you assume that an appropriate placement *is* available someplace else? it is clear that there are places in the us where no program exsists that is appropriate for oral deaf kids other than a private school, that is why the districts pay the tution. why do you assume that this is not one of those situations?
Click to expand...

Well, if there are no placement services for the oral deaf within a reasonable area except for the private school, then I understand. If the area is big enough, then there should be a chunk of people wanting specific services from this area. I do consider oral deaf to need different services than "mainstreamed".

However, I see no indication whatsoever about no services for the oral deaf in that area. So I think FJ is making assumptions about there being no services within 50 miles while Jillio assumes that there are services next door. But they are STILL assumptions.

Considering where Clarke is.... I suspect that there are reasonable services that can be made for the deaf child nearby. I don't know why it has to be THIS or THAT. There's always room to please both sides somewhat.

My parents paid for me to go to a private school, but I took advantage of the services offered, so I had free speech therapy in a public school within my district.
 
:io:

This is getting too intense for me and I am just backing out and may make use of the ignore feature again. Geez!!!
 
KristinaB said:
:io:

This is getting too intense for me and I am just backing out and may make use of the ignore feature again. Geez!!!
Click to expand...
I am interested in your thoughts on this issue. It is nice to get as many different perspectives rather than a few of them.
 
jillio said:
What are you talking about? Placement is available in this area. At the public school.

Why are you repeating what I have been saying?
Click to expand...

I am saying that you are assuming that there *are* services, when there is no evidence that there are. A public school is NOT the LRE for a deaf child until their language and academics are age appropriate, or at least close. That is why oral programs exist.
 
Back
Top