<html>
HI, Mark:<br>
<br>
At 01:41 PM 9/8/2013 -0400, you wrote:<br>
So how did the advocates for the "special ed" kids do it back
in the 60's - 80's?<br>
How did they successfully "FIGHT" for what their students
needed?<br>
Was it letters and phone calls that finally won a mandate for
service?<br>
Or was it something else....... something more....?<br>
Is it time to embrace whatever strategies they used so
successfully?<br>
<br>
Mark Bohland<br>
<br>
I am not in Ohio, but I have some thoughts about the question you ask.
<br>
<br>
First of all, SpecEd parents were extremely persistent. They
expected to be supporting their children for a lifetime and they were
willing to spend many years fighting for services for them. They
weren't going to go away after one or two setbacks. For many of them,
their kids were their jobs. I often hear from TAG parents that they
appreciate my efforts, but they have so many other obligations.....<br>
<br>
Second, much more money was involved--both for the parents who felt that
they <i>had</i> to send their children to extremely expensive special
schools and for society, which would have to pay to support these
children for the rest of their lives if they never became
employable. TAG parents may feel their children are wasting their
time in school, but they still mostly expect their children to survive
the experience (even if this is unduly optimistic). If they
become completely frustrated, they expect to be able to
home-school. Our political system hasn't yet figured out that
homeschool, however, successful it is for the students, is an expensive
option for families and society when it takes a working adult out of the
workforce.<br>
<br>
Third, advocating for Special Ed. children did not involve the same
social penalty. A TAG parent soon learns that owning up to having
gifted children is a fast way to lose friends and alienate
neighbors. Even worse is the effect it may have on the childrens'
teachers. TAG parents often apologize before admitting their child is
gifted. Often they don't want to be outed and they even more don't
want their children to be outed. Special ed. kids usually couldn't
hide their issues. TAG kids can't either, but often people think
they can or should. <br>
<br>
Fourth, the Special Education movement was more politically
palatable. It promised to help the underdog or, to put it in modern
terms, it promised to increase "equity" and close the
achievement gap. Gifted ed. threatens to increase inequity.
It also took place in a period when the public was perhaps feeling a bit
more generous with public service expenditures. Large corporations that
rely on intellectual capital figure they can buy it on the world
market--they don't have to fund public school services in their home
towns. Their officers see gifted education as a political minefield (as
opposed to simply and meaninglessly supporting "rigor for all"
without paying for it). There doesn't seem to be any profit motive that
would drive corporations to spend on public school gifted programs--or to
persuade the government to finance them. <br>
<br>
But finally, and I think most important, the Special Ed community itself
was organized differently. It was a set of national advocacy
organizations, not a smallish group of academic researchers. Some of
those organizations had, and still have, pretty sizeable resources.
The NAGC is simply not an organization by and for irate parents, as the
kerfuffle over the new "definition" of giftedness shows.
<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab><br>
We really need more effective national leadership. Fighting this
battle state by state and district by district is simply not
working. High quality information in itself is not enough. We
have some foundations that are doing an excellent job of helping a
relatively small group of gifted individuals, but no one is putting real
money behind a serious political campaign that would help gifted children
as a group. There aren't any celebrity spokesmen or corporate
sponsors or a large stable of lobbyists. <br>
<br>
This would be a very different conversation if the Federal
Government was willing to put some muscle behind seeing that these
students got an education. <br>
<br>
Margaret<br>
<br>
At 01:41 PM 9/8/2013 -0400, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>So how did the advocates for the
"special ed" kids do it back in the 60's - 80's?<br>
<br>
How did they successfully "FIGHT" for what their students
needed?<br>
Was it letters and phone calls that finally won a mandate for
service?<br>
Or was it something else....... something more....?<br>
Is it time to embrace whatever strategies they used so
successfully?<br>
<br>
<br>
Mark Bohland</blockquote></html>