Replies

Here's what I remember reading. Perhaps some of it is wrong, or exaggerated, but I do remember it.

The average per pupil cost of education is about $5,000 or so. The average cost of special education is $15,000 or so. So for the price of educating three people who will probably succeed, you're educating one person who most likely won't.

I often hear rhethoric such as "Education is an investment in our kids". That makes us less unhappy when we send our tax checks out around now; we're getting something for our money in terms of future generations. But if we're making large "investments" in people who will most likely fail, what we're really doing is selling out kids who have greater ability. As you said, the people who are worse off are those who don't qualify for special education, but aren't smart enough to do well.

The whole idea of spending this much money to help people who, in the aggregate, cannot be helped strikes me as an enormous waste of our "investments". What we really need from our "investment" is people who can read, write and do a sum or two. Nothing fancy, but from what I'm seeing, we're not getting it.

I certainly think we should try to get it before we put our "investments" in the people least likely to benefit from them.

First of all, I can only speak for my school district and my school, since that is the one with which I have experience.

Before you assume that special education children can't succede, remember, success looks different to different people. The kids I work with read/write at about a 4th grade level (these are middle schoolers) and their best case scenerio is probably a 7th grade level assuming they get some pretty good instruction in high school. (The reasons for their lack of ability in reading are as varied as the children. That is an entirely different thread though!) You would probably be appalled if your own child graduated with this level of literacy, but this is enough for them to be gainfully employed at some point. Are they going to be lawyers or doctors? Doubt it, but do we need a world of all professionals? Nope.

You say it costs more to educate them, and you are correct. I don't know the most current numbers; yours are probably low. However, any of these numbers will be a bit skewed however. Remember that special education runs the gamut from those in wheelchairs needing IV's, to deaf, blind, physically disabled, Down's syndrome, autistic, mentally retarded, and those just needing extra instruction in reading or math. Within the special education field, the severe/profound take up over 70% of the total funds allocated. The learning disabled (with which I work) generally take only a bit more than the average student.

So, we have a fact here, the severely and profoundly disabled, with IQ's of 40 or below take up a great deal of money. Some require more than $1,000,000 of instruction and care before they are 21. But what's the answer? Should they stay at home for their whole lives? Institutions? Should they not be allowed to live because they take up more than their share of resources? I don't have the answer and don't pretend to as I don't work with that population--I only work with learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, and autistic children.

Of course the severe/profound take tax payer dollars to care for during their whole lives, but what would it say about our society if we refused to give them the best we could?