Moving Toward Inclusive Sports

            Last week the Obama Administration through the Office of Civil Rights sent school districts across the country a guidance document that outlines the rights of students with disabilities to participate in school athletics.

           The thirteen page document outlined five principals and provided specific examples for enforcement of civil rights law.  School Districts were informed when offering sports they cannot generalize students with disabilities.  Schools must consider each student and provide “reasonable modifications” to games but not “fundamental alterations” that would significantly change the game or give students with disabilities an advantage.  Additionally, schools must provide students with disabilities on teams the same aides after school as they would have during the school day[i].

            The action taken by the Office of Civil Rights is a significant win for parents who have children with disabilities who have championed the cause for school sports being inclusive.  It is well known the benefits participation in sports has on building a healthy lifestyle, leadership and character traits.  For students with disabilities, participation in school sports has additional benefits.

Participation in school sports helps students with disabilities build relationships with non-disabled peers.  The stigmas and misinformation attached to students with disabilities in an academic setting become transferred into the non-academic realm.  The generalizations and assumptions made by non-disabled peers and coaches hinder the opportunity to view disabled students as a teammate. 

If coaches and non-disabled peers truly understood that students with disabilities have the intangible qualities they seek in a teammate, the Office of Civil Right would not have to be involved.  On a daily basis, students with disabilities show courage, determination, and full effort to overcome the challenges of their disability.  Their academic lives are filled with meeting the goals and objectives in their Individualized Education Plan (IEP) so they know what their task is and understand the road that leads to success.  These are the qualities every coach coveted by every coach.

The guidelines by the Office of Civil Rights should provide the opportunity to demonstrate the abilities of disabilities.  Once the stigmas fall away and assumptions corrected, inclusive school sports teams will be the norm.  Hopefully, years later people will look back on the action taken by the Obama Administration and celebrate it as an historic moment in our history and we will wonder why it took so long for it to be done.

---

[i] www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/students-disabilities-school-sports-obama_n_2546057.html

The Miseducation of a Celebrity

            Last week I attended an event where the guest speaker was a well-known recording artist who spoke about his involvement in causes of social justice.  As the artist began speaking about the various social justice causes he supports and why, when he began to talk about the problems in public education, he spoke with the same narrow, prescriptive lens as many celebrities and high profile individual supporters of the transformation of public education.

            The artist, like many celebrities and high profile individuals spoke about public education from a deficit perspective with sweeping generalizations.  Speaking as he was an “authority” on the problems in public education, the artists discussed the research studies he has read, the schools he has visited, and discussions he has engaged in with high profile individuals in the public and private sectors, politicians and others with interest in public education. 

The solutions the artist claimed would transform public education reflected a shallow and simplistic view of the problems plaguing public education.  Arguing the problems in public education stemmed from unions, poverty and lack of qualified teachers and resources in poorer schools.  The artist believed that competition from charter schools, diminishing the power of unions and creating empowerment zones such as the one in Harlem would transform public education.

Although these ideas were a rehashing of solutions previously stated by many celebrities and high profile individuals, surprisingly absent from the artist solutions was an acknowledgement of being part of an industry that targets youth and promotes academic underachievement.  The artist failed to consider how the recording/entertainment industry creates a perception of success coming via underachievement and under education.  Many recording artists are portrayed and promoted as being street smart with a criminal past.  Many of the most successful recording artists are the ones who’s “street cred” is based on having a criminal past that includes not completing high school, selling drugs and being incarcerated.  Additionally, the boasting about excess (money, sex and drugs) in their music and lifestyle captures the attention of impressionable youth who seek to emulate this lifestyle instead of getting an education.  If public education is to be transformed, outside influences such as the targeting of youth by the entertainment industry must be addressed.

As we work to transform public education, it is important that celebrity and high profile supporters understand the problems plaguing public education are complex and multilayered and should not be generalized or viewed as simplistic.  It is also important for celebrities and high profile supporters to understand the impact they could have on the transformation of public education if they can change the culture of their industry that promotes underachievement and targets youth.

Armed Teachers?

            Last week’s topic discussed the decision by the leadership of some school districts to have armed police inside school buildings. This week’s topic will discuss the decision by the leadership of some school districts to provide firearms training to teachers.

In response to the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School the leadership of some school districts decided to provide teachers with firearms training.  The rationale to provide firearms training teachers is based on the idea that in the event of a potentially deadly crisis, an armed teacher would be able to counter or eliminate the threat and minimize fatalities.

The rationale behind the decision to provide firearms training to teachers is reckless and irresponsible.  This flawed rationale assumes that 1) having armed teachers will act as a deterrent to future deadly crises and 2) in a crisis an armed teacher will act in the manner of a trained professional.

The assumption that training and arming teachers will deter future deadly crises is wrong.  It is virtually impossible to predict when and where a catastrophic event may occur.  Therefore, district leaders should focus on ensuring protocols involving the visitation of individual into school buildings are stringent and comprehensive.  Typically, when a visitor comes into a school building, the visitor signs in at a front desk, sometimes a request for identification is asked by the person at the front desk and the visitor is sent to the main office.  At the main office, the visitor states their purpose for the visit and waits to conclude the purpose of their visit by either waiting to pick up their child or being taken to a room for a conference.  Visitation protocols could be strengthened by having a secured waiting room that is near the front desk and directly away from children.

Having a secure waiting room could prevent a violent act from occurring since the potential offender would likely show signs of nervousness or frustration over not being able to directly enter the building to reek havoc.  This display of nervousness or frustration would be a warning sign of a potential threat.  The secure waiting room would be the place to further assess if the visitor is a threat to school safety.

The final flaw in the rationale of training armed teachers is the belief in how a teacher will respond to a real threat to school safety.  The assumption is the armed teacher will respond to an armed threat with deadly force if the threat cannot be countered or deterred.  Asking a teacher to be prepared to take a life is a zero sum gain.  I do not believe enough thought was considered to the emotional toll and trauma a teacher will go through if he/she has to take the life of another person, even if the act was justified.  If trained service men and women have emotional and traumatic damage from taking lives in war, how do we expected teachers who will be given significantly less training will respond to the emotional trauma?

An Armed Presence in Schools?

                It has been several weeks since the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary.  The nation has heard the call for gun control from President Obama and the call for armed staff in schools from the National Rifle Association (NRA).  However, it is the response from school districts across the country that is most disturbing.

                As students returned from winter break, many came back to school to see armed police roaming the hallways.  It was also reported that teachers and administrators in some states would be given fire arms training and carry weapons.  After what occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary, you would think the response from school districts would be contrary to the call from the NRA.

                The ill-conceived reactionary response by district leaders to place armed police inside school buildings shows a lack of sensitivity to students and staff.  Before the decision was made to place armed police in schools, staff and students should have been given the opportunity to have their concerns heard.  There was no reason for district leaders to make a rush decision.  If district leaders would have allowed for the input of students and staff, they may have heard concerns that may have changed there minds and consider other options.

                One of the concerns district leaders would have heard is having armed police inside a school building changes the dynamic of the school climate and discipline policy.  Police are not trained to work in schools, they are unfamiliar with school discipline policies, and they are trained to investigate, prevent and stop violations of the criminal law code.  Police are trained to view the law in “black or white,” there is no grey area, that’s for the District Attorney to decide.  As educators, we know school discipline policies such as fighting or threats to harm, petty theft, even personal consumption of drugs are dealt with differently according to the circumstances surrounding the offense.  For example: 1) was the offense a result of adolescent immaturity (i.e.: horseplay taken too far)? 2) Was anyone injured? 3) Was there an intent to sell or is it personal consumption?  4) Are the student(s) first time offenders or multiple offenders? Lastly, is the consequence for the violation a suspension, expulsion, or an arrest?  Educators understand the culture of the school and are better prepared to make a fair judgment in the best interest of students and the school

                District leaders may have also heard from students and staff on the best response to this tragedy was to rally the school together to have discussions/trainings on school safety.  Students and staff could be taught how to recognize and respond if a life-threatening incident should occur in their school.  District resources could be used on implementing an emergency response system that would inform students, staff and law enforcement in the event of a life-threatening occurrence.

                Instead of placing armed police inside school buildings, district leaders should be “arming” students and staff with knowledge and implementing an emergency system that could prevent or greatly diminish the harm to students and staff.