How to Improve Security in the Department of Education for Children with Disabilities - Article Example

MEMORANDUM May 4, Chancellor Carmen Farina, NYC Department of Education 45021D Policy analyst, Chancellor’s Office, NYC Department of Education RE: How to improve security in the Department of Education for children with disabilities Introduction This memo is in response to your security concerns in the NYC Department of Education that has seen a number of students become victims. Since the mortal vanishing of 14-year-old Avonte Oquendo, who was suffering from autism, there has been increasing interest to curb the tragedies that can be prevented. One of the frequent questions asked by stakeholders is the extent to which the Department of Education (DOE) has put in place policies to protect children with disabilities. There have been many activities going on within schools aimed at restructuring the security system to curb such occurrences including formulating policies on reporting emergencies. Moreover, there are worrying statistics on the causes of tragedies in schools as some are because of negligence of staff (Karo, 2014). This memo analyzes chancellor policy A-412, which sets forth the responsibilities of staff for maintaining security and safety in the schools. The regulation outlines detailed procedures of reporting and notifying as well as distinguishing students with special needs that require attention from school administrations. This is sometimes cumbersome since some incidents calls for immediate action before notification and reporting. The policy also establishes schools’ responsibilities in the event that police and other investigatory agencies seek to question staff. However, the regulation has not worked to benefit the students and staff; its provisions may have contributed to Oquendo’s disappearance, for instance. This memo will evaluate the chancellor’s regulation no A-412 that gives medical exceptions and ways of improving security among disabled children in the Department of Education. It will do so by assessing the problem and current research, and making a recommendation on improving the security of disabled children in the care of the DOE. Assessment of the problem It is exactly one year since NYC launched special education reforms initiatives referred as a shared path to success (White 2013). It was policy change aimed at mainstreaming the estimated 24,000 students in district 75, which is the DOE’s citywide special education district. It was also to streamline the roughly 180,000 students in public schools with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). IEPs are meant for students with disabilities. According to this policy, not every student with an IEP is categorized as a District 75 student or those with severe disabilities. The main goal of the reform is to educate students with special education needs in their communities so that they have access to education just like others who do not have special needs. The reforms are meant to enable disabled students to feel at home when they are with others and learn with them as they share experience and learning materials. Although mainstreaming is heading in the right direction, its result has not been realized since statistics showed that only 5% of students in self-contained educating settings graduate from high school (White 2013). The low number of student finishing school is alarming and it is because of the lack of discipline recorded. The underlying problem started when the chancellor sent a memo outlining protocols in case a student runs away from assigned staff. However, there is a challenge because the safety officers do not have knowledge on students with IEPs. This is due to privacy rules, which do not allow the schools to share such information with cops. However, the adults within the buildings have the capability of protecting students. Additionally, the students with IEPs have cases of poor discipline as most blacks are suspended regularly making them not to cope within school administrators (White 2013). The reforms initiated list 13 IEP classified disabilities including autism. Those who are assessing IEPs are teachers, parents, students and related service providers. They meet at least once a year to readdress the needs of IEP students. Because of this, much misbehavior results in zero tolerance responses, pushing students out of the education system versus being disciplined within the education system (White 2013). The regulation requires the DOE to follow notification requirements in case of school related incidents. It gives a school principal the power to determine any disciplinary and follow-up actions that shall be taken before contacting the superintendent or the parents in case a student is involved. The regulation delegates all major functions of security to the principal. The policy from the chancellor outlines the procedures for medical exceptions, which are prohibitive. In cases where a student does not meet, the criteria for medical exemptions, he or she will not be entitled to medical exception hence will not be considered as a special case. Therefore, some of the cases experienced are because they were not entitled to medical exemptions; hence do not attract attention from caregivers and supervisors. Oquendo’s case, for example, is among the special cases that required attention as he had wandered before and was found in a subway tunnel. He did not have focused goals and objectives on his IEP to enable his school, The Riverview School, to deal with autism. This would have included him being assigned own aide at his school. The school administration did not consider this but instead placed him in a classroom with one aide, one teacher and six students. The inability of his school’s administration to assign him a personal aide was the genesis of his vulnerability since he was not under tight supervision as required by the law for students with serious illness. The DOE was aware that the young boy was a bolter and it showed in his history of bolting which was a life threatening condition and dangerous to him in leaving the school (Arkym 2013). The Riverview School shares most of the special needs programs with middle school and high school general education populations. Similarly, the school shares common places such as libraries, auditoriums, cafeterias, and gymnasiums (White 2013). The sharing tendencies create loopholes where a disabled student is at risk for disappearing as student populations’ move throughout the building. Literature Review Disabled students mostly those suffering from autism and are unable to talk requires one on one (1:1) supervision. Arkym (2013) believes that close supervision is a requirement under the laws as it guarantees them security. At the same time, the author asserts that developing exclusively special need schools to give them the opportunity of developing skills in a safe environment is vital. It has proved to be successful in schools such as Brooklyn. Under such school environments, disabled students enjoy autonomy and close supervision compared to schools with disabled and regular students. Placing cameras outside and inside classroom to sound alarms if a student walks out has also proved effective. Alerting those responsible may help in preventing occurrence of a disaster if done in a timely manner. Moreover, parents can also find out safety procedures for their children in school and advocate change (Arkym, 2013). Taking precautions and advocating for change can put pressure on the school administration to put frameworks in place in curbing insecurity as well as giving medical exemption. The public should be made aware of autism response and notifying authority. Educating autistic individuals on how to be safe as well as first responders who encounters disabled students has proven to be effective as a mitigation measure towards preventing similar cases of walking from school. They will be aware of steps to take in case they meet autistic children or any other disabled students. Some scholars have suggested that the security of disabled children can be enhanced when their IEPs have behavior intervention plans that instruct teachers on actions to take in case such students leave the classroom (Arkym, 2013). Similarly, others have suggested that institutions need to have protocols to legitimize people and students leaving the building. This is achieved through putting security measures in place to curb such incidences. Focusing on the main issues affecting students could be very effective in ensuring safety of disabled students. When staff focuses on the needs of disabled students, there are higher chances of ensuring security (Neil & Noceda, 2007). In cases where the administration does not take care of their needs and no measures put in place, the environment endangers them since the administration doesn’t know what they need pertaining to their security. The strategy of focusing on students need was also supported by Crary’s research (2013), conducted a study on the role of administrations in improving security among disabled and found that understanding their needs is important in achieving high-level security. Moreover, understanding special education students’ different medical and security needs is important as it enables staff to create a ground for offering security and other support required. Tyler (2012) and Sophia (2012) acknowledged the effectiveness of decentralized structures with autonomous and self-regulatory management systems in ensuring security in schools. The DOE is a section or a larger education system and they are autonomous in terms of academics and specialization. This has seen them effective in doing their work in offering academics. They can use the same standards in ensuring security is maintains within the institution. Security is a challenge among disabled students because they have different needs from the rest of the students. Because of this, they require special security measures to enable them to overcome challenges. Decentralizing security measures in the schools will ensure that disabled students are given enough care by addressing their needs. The role of organizational staff cannot be ignored in maintaining security in schools. Dmitry (2007) and Cordner (2006) assert that defining jobs depending on an employee’s multiple skills can enhance her performance. This implies that staff that has a deeper understanding of the needs of disabled students will be better positioned to care for them and give them protection. The authors also asserted that staff who understands special education students’ security and medical needs can act faster in times of crisis compared to others who lack this knowledge. They can also use technological advancements in tracking disabled students within the school (Walsh, 2013). Similarly, other studies have found that viewing employees as partners can enhance security among disabled students in school (Shevitz et al., 2003). Regulation A-412 does not give staff a chance to take part in security issues though it reports that maintaining security is a general responsibility of all. It does not allow staff to make decisions that might reduce insecurity; instead, they have to report to the principal. This makes them subordinate in security issues (Shevitz et al., 2003). Although staff may act before reporting, the chancellor policy does not give medical exemption and only gives it on condition that the student meets the criteria. Research shows that giving employees a chance to take part in security matters helps in decreasing insecurity among disabled. Jana (2012) found that training staff on matters pertaining to security of disabled students could enhance staff understanding of the organization and the security needs of the disabled students. It also allows them to work as a team in promoting the wellbeing of disabled students. Lack of proper understanding by employees can make them lose touch with disabled students. Staff outside special needs programs should be trained to understand the needs of disabled students. From the research summarized here, it is evident that vulnerability among disabled students in the Department of Education can be minimized through options such as training employees on security issues, viewing employees as partners in security issues, defining jobs according to employee capability, decentralizing security structures, and focusing on students’ main problems. Considering these options will result in improvements in the security and other care rendered to the disabled students in the Department of Education. Environmental Scan Within the NYC DOE, there is a lack of proper attention to disabled students because some staff does not understand their needs. The chancellor’s policy in place gives some medical exemption to certain students making it difficult for the staff to relate and distinguish different needs of students. Staffs do not understand the different needs since the policy makes it hard to distinguish them. This has resulted in students walking out of school without their immediate supervisor noticing. Even with policy A-412 in place, it requires a lot to be done in empowering staff and the public on how to relate to autistic children and the reporting procedure which has been a problem resulting to insecurity. Stakeholder Analysis Insecurity among disabled students has become a crucial issue for schools. Therefore, it is important to carry out stakeholder analysis in order to understand the roles, which stakeholders should play. Stakeholder analysis is the evaluation of the roles of those individuals involved in ensuring security of disabled students in the department of education. Similarly, stakeholder analysis is important in assigning duties to those concerned in ensuring and maintaining security. Table 1. Guidelines to Stakeholder analysis Stakeholder Division of operation-Kathlee Grimm Division of specialized instruction and student support-Corine Anselmi Office of the general counsel-Courtnaye Jackson Director of oversight-Andrea Mclean Office safety and youth development Description/Position In charge of operations in New York City schools in the office of the Chancellor Gives specialized instructions and offers support to students In charge in matters pertaining to law and presentation in judicial process Acting as watchdog in seeing the operations on NYC schools Ensuring that youths are safe Source of Influence Influences the operations and activities within NYC schools Directs students on what they should do in ensuring their safety Can influence and enforce viable policies to en sure security Has the ability of rectifying what wrong and taking action Ensuring that youths are secured through development of parameters in ensuring their wellbeing Explanation of the Problem Improper implementation of the chancellors policy Lack of proper supervision to disabled students The policy has some weaknesses making it difficult to enforce lack of oversight role led to partial implementation of the policy Safety of the youths and other disabled student not take n was not taken into consideration Perception of Crisis Medical exemptions needs to be reviewed Crisis can be contained with proper measures in place It can be minimized if all stakeholders work together Crisis can be managed by considering the efforts of all stakeholders Crisis can be managed Proximity to Problem Schools take the responsibility A lot needs to be done in relation to providing customized services The DOD is important more so to disabled students hence the problem should be contained Oversight body needs to be strengthened Youths and disabled students needs to be ensured security Ability to Fix Problem Has the mandate of fixing the problem by implementing the policy The problem can be fixed by meeting the specialized needs of the victims They can fix the problem by defining and knowing its scope The problem can be fixed The problem can be fixed Ends Desired Ensured security for disabled students Increased security of disabled and implementation of specialized programs Maximized security of disabled students Proper accountability and promoted security in DOE All disabled students given equal protection opportunity Definition/Measure of Success Children going to and from school safely Zero tolerance to insecurity Disabled students are contained in school and secured Enhanced security in school Ensured security in school Essential to Solution? Provide security to disabled students Proper implementation of policies Implementing the policy with legal actions against those who goes against Strengthening oversight body to oversee effectiveness of all operations Considering all the information given by parents concerning health of their children Options Specification There are different options available for schools to improve their security. They have been tested options and have proved effective in different schools. Similarly, some have been recommended by various studies done on improving schools security. Option 1: decentralizing the security in the DOE There is need to decentralize security system and give DOE autonomy to have its own security. Currently, a general security is securing all students. This makes them not to identify the needs of the disabled students since other students are catching their attention. Because of this, there is need to have security which focuses on disabled students. Option 2: One-on-one supervision of disabled students Supervision is very important to disabled students. It will enable supervisors to check their movements within the institution. Therefore, one-on-one supervision will be essential in ensuring security of disabled. Option 3: training of staffs Training staffs on security needs of disabled students and how to relate to them is important. It allows for better understanding of the security needs of the disabled students. The case in question was because the inexperienced staff. Table 2 further summarizes these options. Table 2: Options Specification. Options #1 To decentralize and establish autonomous security structures for disabled students #2 one on one supervision of disabled students #3 training staff on disabled security Description of Policy Change Disabled students need special security which should be detached and given autonomy to look after them Increasing the number of staff and assigning each autistic child one staff Staff needs to be trained on security needs of the disabled students to give them in-depth understanding Implementation Responsibility The Chancellor The Chancellor The chancellor Mechanism of Effect Customizing the security needs Close supervision Better understanding of disabled needs Cost Cost of developing independent security needs Cost to hire staff Cost to train staff Legal Requirements None None None Options Assessment The given options are assessed by their effectiveness and feasibility from various perspectives. This section outlines the security changes required and their likelihood of being implemented given their feasibility, effectiveness, and summary rankings as shown in Table 3. The most effective in decentralizing the security system followed by one-on-one supervision and lastly tr5aining staffs on the security needs. Table 3. Options Assessment Options 1 2 3 Description of policy change Decentralize security structures and give them autonomy One on one supervision Training staffs on security needs of disabled Political Feasibility Politically feasible Politically feasible Politically feasible Administrative Feasibility feasible Feasible option feasible Financial Feasibility feasible Feasible option Feasible Equity New York City schools No equity issue No equity issue Effectiveness Very effective to provide required care and to prevent potential incidents Effective to prevent potential incidents Very effective Summary Ranking Most likely will be supported Most likely will be supported Most likely will be opposed Currently, it is very difficult to distinguish the different needs of students since they are not assigned one-on-one supervision. Lack of staff to monitor their movements has been the core challenge leading to their disappearance from school. Assigning one-on-one supervision for autistic children is also viable because it is easy to implement and effective in long run. The third option is to train the staff on the security needs of disabled students and empower staff to respond. Oquendo’s disappearance, for instance, could have been prevented if the security agent who shouted at the boy was trained differently because the officer would have been better equipped with communication gears that he would have used in responding to the child. Staff will be able to learn how to relate to the disabled students. Recommendation I recommend a decentralized security structure that gives DOD autonomy to handle security issues for disabled students. The security needs of disabled students are different from others and this makes it a challenge. They need a system that understands their security needs and their special cases. Giving the department of education autonomy will provide trained staff who can respond and better understand disabled students. Bibliography Arky, B. (2013). Where the system failed Avonte Oquendo. Retrieved from http://nycrubberroomreporter.blogspot.com/2013/10/avonte-oquendos-disappearance.html Connected Learning - Connected Learning - New York City Department of Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/community/innovation/ConnectedLearning/default.htm Information for Vendors - Division of Contracts & Purchasing - New York City Department of Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/DCP/Vendor/Default.htm Student Support, Safety & Activities - New York City Department of Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/StudentSupport/default.htm Crary, D. (2013). Deaths of wandering autistic kids prompts action. Retrieved on 12th March 2014 from http://www.trentonian.com/article/TT/20130811/NEWS04/130819940 Cordner, G. (2006). The problem of people with mental illness. Retrieved on 6th march 2014 from http://www.popcenter.org/problems/mental_illness/print/ Dmitry, Z. (2007). Information security in organizations: drivers, policies and compliance incentives. UMI Dissertations Publishing Jana, H. (2012). Security varies in Northland schools. Journal of Education. 2(23), 34-45. Karo, G. (2014). Missing, Drowned, Burned students, Bloomberg’s leadership policies/How Avonte’s case was a disaster waiting to happen. Retrieved on 12th March 2014 from http://nyceye.blogspot.com/2014/01/missing-drowned-burned-students.html Karo, G. (2014). Missing Avonte Case: waiting to happen under Bloomberg’s reform. Retrieved from http://nyceye.blogspot.com/2014/01/missing-drowned-burned-students.html Panel For Educational Policy - DOE Leadership - New York City Department of Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/leadership/PEP/default.htm Neil, G. & Noceda, K. (2007). Charter schools safer, quieter, report finds: security policies, mentoring help explain differences in campuses. Tribune business news. Shevitz, B., Weinfeld, R., Jeweler, S., & Barnes-Robinson, L. (2003). Mentoring Empowers Gifted/Learning Disabled Students to Soar! Roeper Review, 26 (1), 37-48 Sophia, H. (2012). Private schools balance open culture with need for security. The Wall Street Journal, 3(2). Tyler, G. (2012). Local schools increases security in wake of shooting. Tribune business news. Walsh, M. (2013). Early Intervention Evaluations: what to expect. Retrieved on 12th March 2014 from http://www.specialneedsnewyork.com/category/special-education-advocacy/ White, R. (2013). Missing autistic teen puts focus on school mainstreaming. Retrieved from http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/11/30/public-school-mainstreamingunderfireinlightofmissingautisticteen.html Read More