The top five stories posted in June 2007:
1. Texas Governor Signs Autism Insurance Bill
2. Special Federal Court to Hear Autism Case on June 11
3. A New Blog for Applied Behavior Analysis Junkies
4. South Carolina Legislature Overrides Veto to Pass Autism Insurance Law
5. Vaccine Court Starts Hearing Autism Case, and Other News Briefs
The most popular tags or "labels" for readers researching articles on Autism Bulletin this month:
1. autism services
2. ABA
3. Asperger's
4. health insurance
5. legislation
SOURCE: Google Analytics
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Note to E-Mail Subscribers
A note to e-mail subscribers of Autism Bulletin:
The e-mail feed did not appear to work for stories posted on June 27. You can find them here:
Pennsylvania Governor Urges Passage of Autism Insurance Bill
A Tale from Scranton, Pa.: Classroom Teachers Need More Support If Inclusion Programs Are to Work
The e-mail feed did not appear to work for stories posted on June 27. You can find them here:
Pennsylvania Governor Urges Passage of Autism Insurance Bill
A Tale from Scranton, Pa.: Classroom Teachers Need More Support If Inclusion Programs Are to Work
Advocates for Disabled Kids Take Issue with Journal Story
An Autism Bulletin reader pointed out to me today that a group of advocacy organizations for disabled children took issue with a story in The Wall Street Journal on June 25, "Mainstreaming Trend Tests Classroom Goals."
The Journal piece highlights the challenges that public school teachers are facing in helping disabled kids in their classrooms due to a lack of training and support. The advocacy groups interpreted the article as a slap against the idea of inclusion programs, because, it said, it gave voice to teachers' complaints that educating disabled children was difficult and driving some of them from the profession.
In response, the advocacy groups statement cites a litany of research sources that support the idea that inclusion, when done well, not only benefits disabled kids with a higher quality education than they would receive in separate classrooms for special education; the practice also benefits the educators and school community.
Find the statement here, on the website of the American Association for People With Disabilities. The groups helpfully post a copy of the Journal article, presumably with permission, on their website here.
Other organizations represented by the statement are: the National Down Syndrome Society, the National Down Syndrome Congress, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, and international advocacy group TASH. A key passage about the value of inclusion programs reads:
One factor not mentioned in the statement, which I would have expected: what are the benefits which typically developing students may experience through exposure to and collaboration in class with disabled peers? I would expect researchers to have identified some.
I read the Journal article differently than these advocacy groups, which is not to say their interpretation lacks merit. I took away the message, backed by evidence the reporter cited, that teachers in Scranton, Pa., lacked the proper training and support to make their inclusion settings work for everyone. The article suggested that this was a sad truth facing teachers, disabled kids and their families around the nation. Read more about the story here.
If you have thoughts to add about this important issue, please do so here or e-mail me at michaelsgoldberg AT yahoo.com.
The Journal piece highlights the challenges that public school teachers are facing in helping disabled kids in their classrooms due to a lack of training and support. The advocacy groups interpreted the article as a slap against the idea of inclusion programs, because, it said, it gave voice to teachers' complaints that educating disabled children was difficult and driving some of them from the profession.
In response, the advocacy groups statement cites a litany of research sources that support the idea that inclusion, when done well, not only benefits disabled kids with a higher quality education than they would receive in separate classrooms for special education; the practice also benefits the educators and school community.
Find the statement here, on the website of the American Association for People With Disabilities. The groups helpfully post a copy of the Journal article, presumably with permission, on their website here.
Other organizations represented by the statement are: the National Down Syndrome Society, the National Down Syndrome Congress, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, and international advocacy group TASH. A key passage about the value of inclusion programs reads:
Students labeled as having severe and multiple disabilities may appear to have such challenging impairments, and their needs appear to be either so basic (e.g. simple communication skills; appropriate manipulation skills; learning to sit) or so complex (e.g. requiring nursing intervention, G-Tubes, etc) that teaching these students in highly academic, typical classrooms seems improbable, and at the least, impractical. YET – research and best practice shows that this type of student learns more with the almost constant stimulation and numerous and spontaneous opportunities to interact with peers. Special educators, no matter how highly motivated or skilled, cannot provide the necessary ongoing stimulation in self-contained classrooms.
One factor not mentioned in the statement, which I would have expected: what are the benefits which typically developing students may experience through exposure to and collaboration in class with disabled peers? I would expect researchers to have identified some.
I read the Journal article differently than these advocacy groups, which is not to say their interpretation lacks merit. I took away the message, backed by evidence the reporter cited, that teachers in Scranton, Pa., lacked the proper training and support to make their inclusion settings work for everyone. The article suggested that this was a sad truth facing teachers, disabled kids and their families around the nation. Read more about the story here.
If you have thoughts to add about this important issue, please do so here or e-mail me at michaelsgoldberg AT yahoo.com.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Pennsylvania Governor Urges Passage of Autism Insurance Bill
Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell today released a statement urging the General Assembly to pass a bill that would require health insurers to provide coverage for "proven medical treatments" for people with autism spectrum disorders up to age 21, with a cap of $36,000 per year. The bill, called Senate Bill 550, has already passed the state Senate but has not proceeded to a House vote.
"Pennsylvania has made great strides in our effort to 'Cover All Kids' with health insurance, but there is a large group of children for whom coverage is lacking due to a mistaken belief by insurance companies that autism is not a treatable medical condition," Rendell said. "By requiring private insurers to cover the medical services they should already be covering, we can make taxpayer dollars go further and help thousands of young people."
Read full text of the governor's statement here. Read text of Senate Bill 550, as recently amended, here.
The language of the bill specifically calls on managed care providers to create a network of credentialed autism services providers; it also says that while the dollar cap holds at $36,000 per year, insurers may not limit the number of appointments per year a patient may attend.
What kinds of services can be covered? The exact details are to be worked out, according to the Senate-approved version of the bill. It states:
The legislation goes on to say that any newly approved treatment must be covered within 120 days of the publication of these new rules.
Autism advocates in Pennsylvania held a rally on June 25 in support of another autism insurance bill, House Bill 1150, which also calls for covering autism services, with a similar cap of $3,000 per month. The bill was referred to a legislative insurance committee on April 30, according to the Assembly's website. (Read text of the House bill online here.)
The state Speaker of the House, who has a nephew with autism, has made bolstering autism services a key issue on his agenda. Parents and families and advocates have been rallying for it. And now the governor has weighed in.
For recent coverage of Pennsylvania, see:
Pennsylvania House Elects Speaker With Autism Agenda
Pennsylvania Governor Calls for Autism Funding Hike
"Pennsylvania has made great strides in our effort to 'Cover All Kids' with health insurance, but there is a large group of children for whom coverage is lacking due to a mistaken belief by insurance companies that autism is not a treatable medical condition," Rendell said. "By requiring private insurers to cover the medical services they should already be covering, we can make taxpayer dollars go further and help thousands of young people."
Read full text of the governor's statement here. Read text of Senate Bill 550, as recently amended, here.
The language of the bill specifically calls on managed care providers to create a network of credentialed autism services providers; it also says that while the dollar cap holds at $36,000 per year, insurers may not limit the number of appointments per year a patient may attend.
What kinds of services can be covered? The exact details are to be worked out, according to the Senate-approved version of the bill. It states:
Treatment for autism spectrum disorders shall include the following care prescribed, provided or ordered for an individual diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder by a licensed physician or psychologist if the care is determined to be medically necessary: psychiatric care, psychological care, rehabilitative care, therapeutic care, pharmacy care; [and] any care, treatment, intervention, service or item for individuals with an autism spectrum disorder which is determined by the department of public welfare, based upon its review of best practices or evidence-based research, to be medically necessary and which is published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
The legislation goes on to say that any newly approved treatment must be covered within 120 days of the publication of these new rules.
Autism advocates in Pennsylvania held a rally on June 25 in support of another autism insurance bill, House Bill 1150, which also calls for covering autism services, with a similar cap of $3,000 per month. The bill was referred to a legislative insurance committee on April 30, according to the Assembly's website. (Read text of the House bill online here.)
The state Speaker of the House, who has a nephew with autism, has made bolstering autism services a key issue on his agenda. Parents and families and advocates have been rallying for it. And now the governor has weighed in.
For recent coverage of Pennsylvania, see:
Pennsylvania House Elects Speaker With Autism Agenda
Pennsylvania Governor Calls for Autism Funding Hike
A Tale from Scranton, Pa.: Classroom Teachers Need More Support If Inclusion Programs Are to Work
"Inclusion doesn't work unless class sizes are greatly reduced."
"Children are suffering due to lack of support."
"We need more help!"
These quotes are from classroom teachers in the Scranton, Pa., public school system, where two-thirds of 750 teachers surveyed listed the inclusion of special education students in mainstream classrooms as their top concern. The quotes are included in a June 25 front-page article in The Wall Street Journal entitled "Mainstreaming Trend Tests Classroom Goals," which lays out why the trend of including disabled children in public school classrooms is creating problems and why experts believe it is a key factor behind teacher turnover and a shortage of qualified teachers across the nation.
If a student in your family with an autism spectrum disorder is in a mainstream classroom or may have this opportunity in the future, this article would be good to read. The article uses stories from Scranton to illustrate that:
* Teachers don't get enough training to know what to do with children who have a wide range of disabilities, including autism. Without the right kind and amount of training, they can't educate these children effectively to help the entire class progress.
* There aren't enough special education staff to support disabled students and the classroom teacher. Among staff who are in place, special education aides typically are high school graduates and receive little training.
* The results not only create problems for the classroom. They create tension between parents and educators, and potentially among families who share a classroom. The "regular education" students feel neglected, even as the special education students fail to make much progress. So while the policy of mainstreaming, the idea of including disabled kids in mainstream classrooms fulfills goals laid out in federal law to provide every child with a qualified teacher in the least restrictive setting possible, the effect is to burn out teachers who don't have the training and support to make it work.
The bottom line message: while inclusion is a worthy goal -- mainstreaming has the potential to teach kids with all kinds of abilities important lessons they can learn from each other -- it's hard to see how inclusion can work well without the necessary resources. Districts like Scranton -- and one can see how there are many Scrantons across the U.S. -- need to hire more people, train them properly and support them. The people on the front lines of our education system need to be put in positions where they can succeed.
The Journal is a subscription-only publication, but if you can find Monday's newspaper at the library, or have a friend or colleague at work who can share this story with you, it would be worth your time.
"Children are suffering due to lack of support."
"We need more help!"
These quotes are from classroom teachers in the Scranton, Pa., public school system, where two-thirds of 750 teachers surveyed listed the inclusion of special education students in mainstream classrooms as their top concern. The quotes are included in a June 25 front-page article in The Wall Street Journal entitled "Mainstreaming Trend Tests Classroom Goals," which lays out why the trend of including disabled children in public school classrooms is creating problems and why experts believe it is a key factor behind teacher turnover and a shortage of qualified teachers across the nation.
If a student in your family with an autism spectrum disorder is in a mainstream classroom or may have this opportunity in the future, this article would be good to read. The article uses stories from Scranton to illustrate that:
* Teachers don't get enough training to know what to do with children who have a wide range of disabilities, including autism. Without the right kind and amount of training, they can't educate these children effectively to help the entire class progress.
* There aren't enough special education staff to support disabled students and the classroom teacher. Among staff who are in place, special education aides typically are high school graduates and receive little training.
* The results not only create problems for the classroom. They create tension between parents and educators, and potentially among families who share a classroom. The "regular education" students feel neglected, even as the special education students fail to make much progress. So while the policy of mainstreaming, the idea of including disabled kids in mainstream classrooms fulfills goals laid out in federal law to provide every child with a qualified teacher in the least restrictive setting possible, the effect is to burn out teachers who don't have the training and support to make it work.
The bottom line message: while inclusion is a worthy goal -- mainstreaming has the potential to teach kids with all kinds of abilities important lessons they can learn from each other -- it's hard to see how inclusion can work well without the necessary resources. Districts like Scranton -- and one can see how there are many Scrantons across the U.S. -- need to hire more people, train them properly and support them. The people on the front lines of our education system need to be put in positions where they can succeed.
The Journal is a subscription-only publication, but if you can find Monday's newspaper at the library, or have a friend or colleague at work who can share this story with you, it would be worth your time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
