It's really common to blame special needs kids for the rising costs of education. It's common and it's ugly.
The Wall Street Journal says that private-school tuition for special ed kids is a burden on the system. The public schools in New York City cannot serve the needs of many special education students, so those kids are sent to private programs, and the city picks up the check. The Wall Street Journal whines that this responsibility places a $116 burden on the system.
"The DOE said it offers students a strong and comprehensive range of
special-ed services, including innovative programs for children with
autism and other severe disabilities. It said that on the rare occasion
when it can't provide a particular service, it doesn't contest the
parents' efforts to get tuition reimbursement."
(I included that paragraph for one reader, who I know needs a good laugh today.)
Jay P. Greene writes a stellar response.
If private school tuition really is a “burden” as the title asserts,
the cost of private-placement should be a significant portion of the New
York City school budget. It isn’t. If you look at the
NYC education budget you see that schools spent a total of $17.9
billion in 2009. The total cost of private placement is only $116
million, which is about .6% of total spending. This is close to
rounding error for NYC.
(via Joanne Jacobs)
Apt. 11d 
the wsj articles very sloppy. But I do think it reflects a real fear in the school community (especiAlly in NYC, where many families looked for private schoolrograms anyway) that the optiion will be abused by those looking for subsidies for their own dprivatr school choices.
But, shouldn’t the wsj like the trend, if for example, it turns into vouchers for special needs children, since they like vouchers, anyway? Maybe they object to paying the full cost?
(I guess this was a news piece, not an editorial, but maybe we’ll see an editorial next?)
LikeLike
Most news articles are not the result of independent investigation by a reporter, but are fed to the reporter by someone with an agenda. So I would suspect that the Board of Ed may be gearing up to start contesting claims for tuition reimbursement, or at least that someone in power wants them to.
LikeLike
Yes, I agree that the article sounded like a re-reported press release by someone with an interest in pushing an agenda.
(even though I also think that private placements paid of public funds should have a pretty high level of scrutiny).
LikeLike
Of course, the cost of private school tuition could disappear if the public school could simply provide the educational services their students need. . . .
But I guess that’s just crazy talk!
LikeLike