The Virginia Gazette, Williamsburg Virginia > News > ESSAY ...
The term ?at-risk? in the conversation is, at the very least, irresponsible and deserves a more critical look. The school division, community and press need to clearly understand and articulate the full meaning, or lack thereof, of at-risk.
The term itself evokes a powerful and intuitive message. There is, however, no consistent definition, and it may equally be viewed as a stigmatizing term for particular groups.
There are questions that should be addressed. Who exactly is at risk? Is it the children, the family or the community?
Is a quantitative measure for at-risk available or even desired?Essentially, there is little or no specific data for, or indication of, the nature of risk. The term may be used vaguely in reference to undesirable life outcomes in general. The ease to which reference is made to the term at-risk is suspect. At-risk may serve to suit any number of agendas or initiatives, the least of which may be the proper and efficient education of our children.
At-risk has no established mandate, resource or guideline. The term is a slippery slope. It may or may not refer to an individual identified in one of the federally and state mandated sub-groups.
If a child is in an identifiable sub-group, then the law requires a particular pool of funds be utilized for that child?s education. There is no such requirement when a child is labeled at-risk.
If the conversation refers to at-risk children primarily belonging to a funded and mandated sub-group, such as special needs, low income, English language learners, etc., then why is there not a discussion about how the funding pools for these groups are being allocated?
In reference to the pre-K program: If we do indeed have approximately 170 kids who are identified as belonging to a particular sub-group, then why are we not utilizing the funding sources available to pay for it? Title I, IDEA and Medicaid should all be used at little or no cost to the taxpayer and the $3 million-plus the school division says it is paying is in need of a thorough investigation. In terms of low-income special-needs children, if they are eligible for Medicaid, then it is a reasonable assumption that Medicaid would cover some, if not all, costs. Medicaid may also cover the cost of assessments as well.
It is terribly disappointing and troubling that the leadership at WJC Schools has not clearly articulated to the public what the context of at-risk means to the budget and the overall education of our children. By not addressing this they have allowed for misunderstanding and perpetuated a misnomer.
There is another possibility that needs mentioning. If the division clearly articulates the identification of children falling within the sub-groups, then the funding and resources are easier to follow. This would set a precedent. This would also lead to a closer examination of how funding sources are applied. The $3 million-plus we are spending on pre-K may take on a different context. So might many other educational programs in kind.
Patrick Sensiba is an education professional who has experience working in public and private secondary schools and colleges. He ran for the WJC School Board last year.
[simpleblog:count:1000:::filename:1::1:asc] comments to this story.
-->
Posted comments are for meaningful discussion that is germane to the article. No personal attacks or insults. Submit complaints by clicking Report abuse.
Source: http://www.vagazette.com/articles/2012/03/11/news/doc4f517e5f55415932477282.txt
drosselmeyer drosselmeyer local time when is daylight savings 2011 cain gingrich debate andy rooney dies andy rooney dies