Maini's thoughts on learning disabilities

SEPAC just released candidate statements on Special Education questions , also published by Village Green. The questions are thoughtful and the answers are enlightening. Here is a link to the Village Green story.

http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/soma-board-ed-candidates-weigh-special-education

One response by Annemarie Maini I found quite surprising and concerning.

In her SEPAC statement, Annemarie Maini Writes:

"I’ve learned a lot about childhood development and the fact that many learning disabilities are not necessarily permanent conditions if children receive interventions (the earlier the better) that provide them with successful coping skills."

This is inaccurate. A properly identified learning disability is a life-long condition. While interventions can help, a learning disability is permanent. A child doesn't "grow out" of dyslexia, for instance.

What Maini is saying is contrary to what every established disability organization has said. For example:

"Learning disabilities are both real and permanent." National Center for Learning Disabilities, https://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-State-of-LD.pdf

"A learning disability can't be cured or fixed; it is a lifelong issue. With the right support and intervention, however, children with learning disabilities can succeed in school and go on to successful, often distinguished careers later in life." WETA / LD Online, http://www.ldonline.org/ldbasics/whatisld

"Learning disabilities do not go away — they’re with you for life." PBS News Hour, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/five-misconceptions-about-learning-disabilities/

In my view, that Maini has this misconception after running a school for 8 years is really quite shocking. Frankly, it would make me hesitant to vote for her for Board of Education.

I'm not well versed in this area, but it strikes me that her statement:

"I’ve learned a lot about childhood development and the fact that many learning disabilities are not necessarily permanent conditions if children receive interventions (the earlier the better) that provide them with successful coping skills."

Seems similar to this one that you posted, if one interprets her "permanent conditions" to mean a permanent negative impact on future outcomes:

"A learning disability can't be cured or fixed; it is a lifelong issue. With the right support and intervention, however, children with learning disabilities can succeed in school and go on to successful, often distinguished careers later in life." WETA / LD Online,http://www.ldonline.org/ldbasics/whatisld "

If her conclusion was that no interventions were needed, I could see how this would be a significant concern. But the fact that she uses "coping" seems to indicate that she doesn't see it as truly disappearing, but instead being coped with.

I think her words speak for themselves.Not a permanent condition is pretty unequivocal.

What she said is inaccurate at worst and inarticulate at best.

I was also perplexed by her statement about phonics. Not sure what she has against phonics. Sounds like we are back at the whole language wars.

"In that regard, I worry that some of our reading interventions, which see phonics as the single best approach, delay getting at a child’s real issues. All children learn differently, in particular when learning to read, especially when they have specific learning disabilities."

Experts agree phonics based approaches are best for students with learning disabilities and are also highly effective with students showing a reading gap who are Low SES So I'm really not sure what she is saying.

Our district does use phonics based reading interventions because they are most effective with the population targeted but this is alongside content and comprehension approaches .

Very troubling. In the past my discussions with board members has shown me that most are not well versed in learning disabilities. Few have a real clue of how out of district placements work, how they give the district flexibility, and long term out of district placements create fewer financial liabilities for the district.

Thanks for posting this.

mod said:
In her SEPAC statement, Annemarie Maini Writes:


"I’ve learned a lot about childhood development and the fact that many learning disabilities are not necessarily permanent conditions if children receive interventions (the earlier the better) that provide them with successful coping skills."

.............

"A learning disability can't be cured or fixed; it is a lifelong issue. With the right support and intervention, however, children with learning disabilities can succeed in school and go on to successful, often distinguished careers later in life." WETA / LD Online, http://www.ldonline.org/ldbasics/whatisld


.

Sounds to me like Maini is saying, with an admittedly poor choice of words, that: "With the right support and intervention, however, children with learning disabilities can succeed in school and go on to successful, often distinguished careers later in life.".

I'm not a professional educator/child psychologist, but based on my experience, could it be possible that her intention was more along the lines of.....

"I’ve learned a lot about childhood development and the fact that many learning [problems that may or may not be]disabilities are not necessarily permanent conditions if children receive interventions (the earlier the better) that provide them with successful coping skills."

Many very bright children who have ADD are able to compensate in the early school years and keep their heads above water. If my ADD kid had the hyperactivity element as well, it may have been recognized earlier. We didn't get a diagnosis until 14 or 15 years old, when this honor student started failing classes.

Before testing, I charted out grades and teachers' comments from kindergarten through 9th grade. I'm not a trained professional who would identify lost assignments, homework consistently not handed in (though completed at home) and a slow but steady decrease in grades as ADD, but I sure wish someone had. Not one teacher or administrator made the connection.

From talking with other parents, I've heard that SOMSD does not have a good record of screening for/identifying ADD in younger children. If my kid had an "intervention" (no one even used that term then), and the advantage of learning specific coping skills -- or even medication -- early on, there's no telling what a difference that could have made in his educational progress and his whole attitude about education. When I informed the school he'd been diagnosed with severe ADD by a highly-regarded neuro-psychologist (whom we'd paid $3,000 out of pocket), I was told, "Oh, well he won't get anything for that!"

Personally, I find Maini's approach to early intervention, (especially with learning hurdles that are difficult to identify, such as ADD) to be a positive. At east someone might be paying attention.

I love how every one is positing what Maini might have meant(because she couldn't actually mean what she said in a prepared statement. ) If she gets elected to the board will we need a Maini translation tool?

mod said:

SEPAC just released candidate statements on Special Education questions , also published by Village Green. The questions are thoughtful and the answers are enlightening. Here is a link to the Village Green story.
http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/soma-board-ed-candidates-weigh-special-education
One response by Annemarie Maini I found quite surprising and concerning.

...

In my view, that Maini has this misconception after running a school for 8 years is really quite shocking. Frankly, it would make me hesitant to vote for her for Board of Education.

I think you are parsing words, and that it doesn't matter much in any event if everyone agrees that early interventions are valuable and appropriate. Whether one believes that the intervention is treatment or cure is irrelevant so long as the intervention is being done, right?

I have not decided for whom to vote in the upcoming BOE election, but your post seems more like "gotcha" fearmongering than genuine concern. Are you aligned with one of the opposing slates? If so, please disclose that so others can weigh your comments accordingly.

Juniemoon said:
I'm not a professional educator/child psychologist, but based on my experience, could it be possible that her intention was more along the lines of.....
"I’ve learned a lot about childhood development and the fact that many learning [problems that may or may not be]disabilities are not necessarily permanent conditions if children receive interventions (the earlier the better) that provide them with successful coping skills."
Many very bright children who have ADD are able to compensate in the early school years and keep their heads above water. If my ADD kid had the hyperactivity element as well, it may have been recognized earlier. We didn't get a diagnosis until 14 or 15 years old, when this honor student started failing classes.

Before testing, I charted out grades and teachers' comments from kindergarten through 9th grade. I'm not a trained professional who would identify lost assignments, homework consistently not handed in (though completed at home) and a slow but steady decrease in grades as ADD, but I sure wish someone had. Not one teacher or administrator made the connection.
From talking with other parents, I've heard that SOMSD does not have a good record of screening for/identifying ADD in younger children. If my kid had an "intervention" (no one even used that term then), and the advantage of learning specific coping skills -- or even medication -- early on, there's no telling what a difference that could have made in his educational progress and his whole attitude about education. When I informed the school he'd been diagnosed with severe ADD by a highly-regarded neuro-psychologist (whom we'd paid $3,000 out of pocket), I was told, "Oh, well he won't get anything for that!"
Personally, I find Maini's approach to early intervention, (especially with learning hurdles that are difficult to identify, such as ADD) to be a positive. At east someone might be paying attention.

Our district is doing early reading intervention for students regardless of whether they are classified. It has been successful. The district has been doing this in earnest for several years. Maini is not identifying a new idea her

It's not gotcha fear mongering Tom Devon but yes I am calling out statements that belie the expertise she claims she has. There is a lot of information out there and much of it takes a lot of time to wade through- like 19 page SEPAC questionnaires and 2 hour debates. I am highlighting what concerns me.

I have a candidate sign in my yard just as many of the posters on these threads do. I came to my decision after watching the first debate. You all can read my comments and read Maini's and all the other candidates words and make up your minds who to vote for. And please watch the debates but most of all get out and vote for your chosen candidates on Nov 3

mod said:
I am highlighting what concerns me.
I have a candidate sign in my yard just as many of the posters on these threads do.

FWIW: I have no candidate sign in my yard, no personal or professional relationships with any candidates, and at this point, my interest is piqued by candidates in different slates based on the recorded Hilton debate/statements made at BOE meetings/local reporting, etc.

sprout said:

mod said:
I am highlighting what concerns me.
I have a candidate sign in my yard just as many of the posters on these threads do.

FWIW: I have no candidate sign in my yard, no personal or professional relationships with any candidates, and at this point, my interest is piqued by candidates in different slates based on the recorded Hilton debate/statements made at BOE meetings/local reporting, etc.

Good to know. Seriously, my flippant remarks aside , I'm not out to "get" Maini or any other candidate. I defended Maini when someone suggested her position at her PreSchool was a conflict of interest . (It's not )

I'm bringing up issues that I think are indicative of a disconnect between the background and expertise she claims to have

Thanks for clarifying. My suspicion-meter went up as this seemed to be the second anti-Maini thread... and I don't recall any other critiques directed specifically at any of the other 8(?) candidates.

You really seem to have something against Maini

Learning disabilities are varied and on a spectrum from mild to severe. Early intervention can, in fact, diminish significantly or eliminate these problems for some students. That's why so many advocate for early intervention. Also, and this is not a popular view today, some kids are just not ready for academics at a very early age. My son refused anything to do with reading until the second half of first grade. Suddenly it clicked and he caught up to grade level by the end of the year. I'm glad he was not labeled as dyslexic and inundated with unneeded remediation that could have caused more harm.

So there are multiple sides on this complex issue. I am familiar with the research base on this, as represented by LD online and PBS as cited above and it is not unbiased, despite claiming to be grounded in science.

It's Maplewood Online, I assume everyone has an axe to grind or some agenda.

Can we just get something clear here though?

Learning disabilities are with you for life. They don't go away.

And phonics should be a huge part of early education.

nan said:
Learning disabilities are varied and on a spectrum from mild to severe. Early intervention can, in fact, diminish significantly or eliminate these problems for some students. That's why so many advocate for early intervention. Also, and this is not a popular view today, some kids are just not ready for academics at a very early age. My son refused anything to do with reading until the second half of first grade. Suddenly it clicked and he caught up to grade level by the end of the year. I'm glad he was not labeled as dyslexic and inundated with unneeded remediation that could have caused more harm.
So there are multiple sides on this complex issue. I am familiar with the research base on this, as represented by LD online and PBS as cited above and it is not unbiased, despite claiming to be grounded in science.

Ok, I'll bite. What about the research cited by LD Online and PBS is "not unbiased"?

alp said:
It's Maplewood Online, I assume everyone has an axe to grind or some agenda.
Can we just get something clear here though?
Learning disabilities are with you for life. They are permanent. They don't go away.
And phonics should be a huge part of early education.
I just want to make sure we all understand that. Because it's a huge myth and misconception.

You are the one with the huge myth and misconception. We need to be concerned with learning disabilities that are affecting school performance. While they may remain for life, they may cease being an issue. Furthermore, there are many kinds of learning disabilities and they don't all require huge amounts of phonics for remediation. What about hyperlexia? That's the opposite of dyslexia--where a student learns to decode well, but not comprehend. Of course phonics should be apart of early education. NO ONE is saying otherwise, and it is a significant part of early education in South Orange/Maplewood.

The reading war is over and thankfully balanced instruction won.

Let's be exceedingly clear. The correct intervention can positively impact a child who learns differently to learn. It will not in any way diminish the LD. It's NOT the child who needs to change, it's the in classroom tactics and strategies behind it.

Mainstreaming is total nonsense. Yes I know it's the law. It's nonsense. A kid who learns differently in many, even most cases, simply cannot learn sitting in a "regular" classroom. It's not only the teachers, it's the classroom environment that many times has dozens of kids in it. That just doesn't work for many

nan said:

alp said:
It's Maplewood Online, I assume everyone has an axe to grind or some agenda.
Can we just get something clear here though?
Learning disabilities are with you for life. They are permanent. They don't go away.
And phonics should be a huge part of early education.
I just want to make sure we all understand that. Because it's a huge myth and misconception.

You are the one with the huge myth and misconception. We need to be concerned with learning disabilities that are affecting school performance. While they may remain for life, they may cease being an issue. Furthermore, there are many kinds of learning disabilities and they don't all require huge amounts of phonics for remediation. What about hyperlexia? That's the opposite of dyslexia--where a student learns to decode well, but not comprehend. Of course phonics should be apart of early education. NO ONE is saying otherwise, and it is a significant part of early education in South Orange/Maplewood.
The reading war is over and thankfully balanced instruction won.

Ok, well, I agree with some of what you wrote. In my child's experience, phonics has been a significant part of early education in South Orange/Maplewood... and that's a GOOD THING.

And we agree that learning disabilities "remain for life." So not sure what we're arguing about? Or what's the myth I have?

I think some learning disabilities remain for life. Others may lessen, go away, or be mild annoyances, like the way I spell its like it's despite obsessive grammar study. It depends on the situation, the severity, and the coping mechanisms learned. Not set in stone.

I can't imagine she meant that learning disabilities can be "cured", so to speak, with interventions. It simply defies logic to read that statement so superficially, particularly with the reference to "coping", which directly implies that there is still, in fact, something to cope WITH.

ctrzaska said:
I can't imagine she meant that learning disabilities can be "cured", so to speak, with interventions. It simply defies logic to read that statement so superficially, particularly with the reference to "coping", which directly implies that there is still, in fact, something to cope WITH.

Then what she wrote is gobbledygook . Her words were chosen to convey a meaning about a subject onwhich she says she has years of experience. What they conveyed to me was that she didn't understand what she was writing about .

I don't read it that way at all, when she says she it's not a permanent condition, I understand that she means that they LD are not permanent, they can change, in the sense that with early intervention the effects on the child can be lessened. My God, the woman is advocating for MORE early intervention, and it seems to me the OP is looking to twist words to bash her. I never heard her say learning disabilities can be cured.

mamabear said:
I don't read it that way at all, when she says she it's not a permanent condition, I understand that she means that they LD are not permanent, they can change, in the sense that with early intervention the effects on the child can be lessened. My God, the woman is advocating for MORE early intervention, and it seems to me the OP is looking to twist words to bash her. I never heard her say learning disabilities can be cured.

The words are Ms. Maini's . I am not twisting anything . It is you all that are twisting yourselves into pretzels to "explain" what she "meant". I look forward to hearing more about her thoughts on Special Education at the debate and again thank SEPAC for the questionnaire

mod said:

mamabear said:
I don't read it that way at all, when she says she it's not a permanent condition, I understand that she means that they LD are not permanent, they can change, in the sense that with early intervention the effects on the child can be lessened. My God, the woman is advocating for MORE early intervention, and it seems to me the OP is looking to twist words to bash her. I never heard her say learning disabilities can be cured.

The words are Ms. Maini's . I am not twisting anything . It is you all that are twisting yourselves into pretzels to "explain" what she "meant". I look forward to hearing more about her thoughts on Special Education at the debate and again thank SEPAC for the questionnaire

FWIW, I think you've been perfectly fair and I agree with your concerns.

mod said:

The words are Ms. Maini's . I am not twisting anything . It is you all that are twisting yourselves into pretzels to "explain" what she "meant". I look forward to hearing more about her thoughts on Special Education at the debate and again thank SEPAC for the questionnaire

Well, right.

Lots of discussion here of what she meant, or might have meant, and, honestly, the least likely (to me) possibility is that:

mod said:

she didn't understand what she was writing about .

There are more debates, and lots of coffees, and I daresay someone without time for those could zap an e-mail to the campaign with a question.

In short, why debate it here instead of asking for follow up or clarification from the candidate?

(And having been a candidate once, I'd say it's pretty unlikely that every sentence out of a non-politician's mouth comes out perfectly clearly, or the way one wanted it to--especially in a first debate.)

jfburch said:

mod said:

The words are Ms. Maini's . I am not twisting anything . It is you all that are twisting yourselves into pretzels to "explain" what she "meant". I look forward to hearing more about her thoughts on Special Education at the debate and again thank SEPAC for the questionnaire

Well, right.
Lots of discussion here of what she meant, or might have meant, and, honestly, the least likely (to me) possibility is that:

mod said:

she didn't understand what she was writing about .

There are more debates, and lots of coffees, and I daresay someone without time for those could zap an e-mail to the campaign with a question.
In short, why debate it here instead of asking for follow up or clarification from the candidate?
(And having been a candidate once, I'd say it's pretty unlikely that every sentence out of a non-politician's mouth comes out perfectly clearly, or the way one wanted it to--especially in a first debate.)

The words in question were not from the first debate, but a prepared response to a questionnaire . But in any event looking forward to the upcoming 2nd debate

Point still holds. No reason not to clarify with candidate before holding forth here.

And still seems unlikely to me that the sentence quoted is evidence of lack of understanding.