Dear Chairman Bourne and Members of the City of
Richmond School Board:
Thank you for all the hard work you do on behalf of
Richmond Public Schools. Your board is off to a great start and I
continuously hear high praise of your efforts from citizens all across the
city. As you know, I continue to advocate for all of Richmond's children,
most especially children with disabilities. The two attached documents are
self-explanatory and troubling on multiple levels.
After John Lloyd, a pro-active parent of a child
with hearing impairments, shared his concerns with me, I spoke to assistant
Supt. Thomas Beatty. I asked Dr. Beatty for permission to visit Huguenot
so I could see first-hand just how crowded [or not] the space is in this
hearing-impaired room. I told him that I simply wanted to measure and
photograph the room. I made it clear that I did not wish to photograph
any children or disrupt the instructional day. Dr. Beatty politely
declined my request and asked that I give him the opportunity to check into the
situation and that he would get back to me.
Subsequent to that discussion, it is my
understanding that Dr. Beatty, Harley Tomey and other RPS
officials visited the space in question and proudly pronounced in a letter to
Mr. Lloyd sent 2/14/2013 on behalf of RPS Supt. Brandon, that based
on "Virginia Construction Code of Virginia" (sic), the
room(s) "are more than double of that required of the law." The
letter boldly claims that the district is required to provide only
20 square feet per occupant of the room.
As you can read for yourselves, Dr. Beatty's
letter does not reference specific language of the Commonwealth of Virginia 2009 Construction Code,
nor does it mention the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) Guidelines that
speak specifically to Mr. Lloyd's concerns about the crowded conditions of the
room, a room where 15 people -- seven (7) children, each with
a one-on-one interpreter, and a case manager -- are expected to have class.
To say that I was shocked by the tone and
content of RPS' administrative response is understatement, given
that VDOE's own guidelines clearly
state:
4.4 Classroom Floor Area for
Self-Contained Special Education Rooms
A.
The minimum net floor areas for special education classrooms including all
features of the self-contained classrooms such as garment storage,
teacher’s storage shelving, work counters, vestibules and incidental
partitions, but excluding classroom toilet rooms, should be as indicated below:
1.
Resource, consultation,
evaluation and/or itinerant rooms with six students maximum should
be 400 square feet (i.e., speech- language therapy, small group
specialized intervention services). Add 50 square feet for each additional
student.
As if using the wrong standard is not insulting
enough to our intelligence, RPS also falsifies the number of occupants in the
room. Only by subtracting five people from the room can RPS
shoehorn their conclusion into their WRONG minimum standard.
A little more research shows further insult.
The latest guidelines of the oldest and
largest international correctional association in the world --The American
Correctional Association (ACA),
formerly known as the American Prison Association -- state:
" ... Cells/rooms
used for housing inmates shall provide at a minimum 25 square feet of
unencumbered space per occupant. Unencumbered
space is usable space that is not encumbered by furnishings or fixtures."
I trust we can all agree that deaf children, and
those who are expected to teach them in RPS, deserve to be treated
better than convicted felons. Consequently, I
ask that you, and your colleagues on the City of Richmond School Board,
intervene in this matter. Further, I ask that you inspire Dr. Brandon and
her staff to proffer a plan to improve the district's dismal 27 percent graduation rate of children with disabilities.
Highest regards,
Carol A.O. Wolf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Remember: I will review all comments before posting and if you wish your information to remain confidential, please know that I will honor your request.