wa123

Of course the shortsightedness of the school district, in selling several school properties to developers, has led to severe overcrowding at the remaining schools, with portables filling what used to be playing fields and blacktops. Luckily, our school district was wise enough not to sell off school sites they didn't need anymore, although lease conditions and such do make reopening them less than an easy process. My son spent a couple of years of his childhood at a school site where all the classes were in portables, and there was no outdoor play space (because the portables were sitting on it).  It was miserable, but it did pass, and was due to a nice remodel.

Why do you think that kids graduating public school today have to spend the first year in college taking remedial courses? There's some of that.  Most of it is with kids who would not, under previous social conditions, be attending college at all.  If you're suggesting that this phenomenon is caused in large part by mainstreaming, then I think you're really out of touch.

I'd think that segregating those kids in a separate special ed class would more effectively cultivate them to be contributors to the economy by allowing them to learn at their own pace, with the added advantage of their not slowing down or disrupting the normal kids. For children who, by high school, clearly are not going to be able to complete many of the standards, it's common for them to do *both*. They have their time to themselves to help with skills that they still need to learn, and they have time in the regular classes to get acclimated to that sort of thing.  Sometimes students are in these classes, trying as hard as they can, getting Fs or maybe being thrilled if they get a D, and it's still better for them than not trying at all. I have actual experience with this stuff.  (Crazy that I feel a need to say it.)

Also Palo Alto Unified junior high schools were 7th through 9th grades in the 1970's until the effects of Prop 13 hit the school district.  Then they moved 9th grade to the high schools and closed one of the three middle schools, with the other two middle schools becoming 7th & 8th grades only. IIRC, it was a little more complicated than that, with declining enrollment playing a part.  They also closed one of the high schools. A couple of years later.  But if it wasn't for Prop 13 (plus changes in school funding from the state) the district would have kept the three high schools and the three junior high schools open despite the smaller enrollment. - Peter

There were also separate schools for retarded kids back then.   There still are, but for those kids who are able, it's usually considered better to expose them to a more mainstream environment now. Better for the tards but it drops the score of the rest of the kids by 50 points with all the disruptions to the classroom. One of the sadder things I saw was many years ago at my daughter's soccer game one Saturday.  She was probably ten.  My wife pointed out a child on the sidelines and said that she was a full inclusion student at the local school, in first grade.  I think that's the same as mainstreaming.  She was in a stroller, which was way too small for her, but worked.  My wife told me that her older sister was on my daughter's team.  The stroller had been placed so the child could easily see the game.  I have no idea if she was watching, or how much she understood.   She just flapped her arms and legs, seemingly randomly.  She also made strange unintelligible noises, not screaming, but not soft either, for the entire game, probably an hour including both halves and the half time in between.  By the end of the game, I was getting irritated.  It was *so* important to the parents that this kid be included in a regular classroom, full time, but nobody interacted with this kid for even one single second the whole hour. I haven't seen one of these children in a classroom.  My wife has seen many.  Each full inclusion child, generally only one in a classroom, has a full time aid.  That's nice, but it is costing the district a pretty penny.  If the child gets too disruptive to the class the aid removes the kid.  My wife said they are not generally able to disrupt the class.   After a very few days, the other students just tune them out.   I don't know how much some of these full inclusion kids are getting out of this.  Certainly, the other kids in the class are learning how to deal with people who are severely disabled.  That's a good skill to have.

My middle daughter sat next to a girl with severe behavioral problems all through first grade.  I never complained.  I knew my daughter could handle it, and I also worried about that girl making it into society.  Most parents probably would've complained. You fuckin' A! My Gawd, no way in hell I'd sacrifice my child's well being for some other kid. That is so antithetical to the duty of a parent. Especially, when a child is at that young helpless age. No way in hell I'd sacrifice my young child for the greater good. That borders on being barbaric. It smacks of some human sacrifice mentality...offering your child up to please the gods. Interesting comment.  How many kids do you have, and what ages? After my kid had served a year in that situation, I might try to make sure that some *other* kids had the opportunity, but I think it's still a learning experience.  Of course, it all depends, on several things.   If my kid isn't getting an education that year, it's time for a talk with the school.