Public Comments for 02/01/2022 Education - K-12 Subcommittee
HB535 - Teachers; required to be compensated at or above national average.
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 1034. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. I have worked in two different public school systems in Virginia over 13 years, and I have seen first hand how beneficial counseling services can be to a wide variety of students. If parents are allowed to prohibit their students from accessing counseling services in the school, these students may be cut off from not only critical mental health support, but but also the academic, career, and community support that school counselors and mental health team members provide. All members of a school mental health team must undergo rigorous education before obtaining their licenses, and as such they should be trusted as the professionals they are to provide only services that they deem necessary for students well-being. I strongly urge you to let the trained mental health professionals do their jobs. Don't make students get tied in the mire of adult squibbles. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB HB1032. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. As VA Senator Peterson said on January 27 of this year, regarding a similar bill, "I don't think we should be involved in micromanaging school libraries...The problem is that you’re going to sweep up books that you don’t intend to sweep up" (Matthew Barakat, abcnews.go.com). I strongly urge you to leave the books in the libraries for the kids. They deserve to have the opportunity to decide with their own parents and personal support systems what books to read. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I strongly support HB535 and encourage the Subcommittee to vote "YES."
Dear Education - K-12 Subcommittee, my name is Tyvon Bates, and on behalf of American Federation of Teachers Virginia, I am writing to urge you to support HB 535 chief patroned by Delegate Clark. Pay was already inadequate before COVID-19 and the pandemic has only brought a new host of job responsibilities and risks—new technologies, new instructional settings, and too often, inadequate health and safety protections. This may be the breaking point for teachers. A RAND study released last year found that among teachers who have left the profession due to COVID-19, the most often cited reason was the “insufficient pay to merit the risks or stress.” This is especially true for teachers under 40 who were more than twice as likely to select this factor as their top reason for leaving. While low pay is making it tough for districts to retain teachers, districts also face challenges recruiting teachers. Total enrollment nationwide in teacher preparation programs has declined by more than one-third since 2010 – and this decline occurred as enrollment in bachelor’s degree programs was on the rise. Among high school students, low pay ranks as the top reason for not being interested in a career in teaching. As the Economic Policy Institute has reported, teachers are paid less than other college-educated workers with similar experience and education. This financial penalty discourages college students from entering the teaching profession and makes it difficult for school districts to retain teachers. Based on the most recent reporting, Virginia had the largest teacher pay penalty at 67.3 cents on the dollar earned by similar college-educated workers. Funding inequities across districts exacerbate the problems for districts with lower revenues and higher student poverty. Nationally, the base salary in high-poverty districts is on average $5,600 lower than low-poverty districts, a difference of nearly 10 percent. And these differences in salary have implications for school systems’ ability to recruit and retain staff. A 2021 study of the educator labor market in Washington state examined job openings statewide and found that shortages are nearly two times higher in high-poverty districts. Using compensation to address the staffing crises means making teaching and school staff jobs more competitive with comparable jobs in the private sector. Higher pay attracts high-achieving young people to enter the teaching profession and helps keep teachers from leaving the profession. And that matters for students. Countries that pay teachers more - Ireland, Canada, and Finland for example - are able to attract teachers with stronger cognitive skills and that makes a difference for students. When teachers have higher cognitive skills, their students perform better in math and reading. Other research has found that raising teacher wages by ten percent reduces high school dropout rates by three to four percent. Virginia has the least competitive teacher pay in the country. Virginia lawmakers should take immediate steps to resolve this. Closing the pay gap between Virginia teachers and other college educated workers would mean raising the average teacher salary by 32.7%. As a step toward that goal, Virginia should raise average teacher pay by 10% to bring teacher pay levels up to the U.S. average. I hope you will join me in supporting HB 535. Thank you, Tyvon Bates American Federation of Teachers Virginia
Dear Education - K-12 Subcommittee, my name is Tyvon Bates, and on behalf of American Federation of Teachers Virginia, I am writing to urge you to support HB 353 chief patroned by Delegate Clark. Pay was already inadequate before COVID-19 and the pandemic has only brought a new host of job responsibilities and risks—new technologies, new instructional settings, and too often, inadequate health and safety protections. This may be the breaking point for teachers. A RAND study released last year found that among teachers who have left the profession due to COVID-19, the most often cited reason was the “insufficient pay to merit the risks or stress.” This is especially true for teachers under 40 who were more than twice as likely to select this factor as their top reason for leaving. While low pay is making it tough for districts to retain teachers, districts also face challenges recruiting teachers. Total enrollment nationwide in teacher preparation programs has declined by more than one-third since 2010 – and this decline occurred as enrollment in bachelor’s degree programs was on the rise. Among high school students, low pay ranks as the top reason for not being interested in a career in teaching. As the Economic Policy Institute has reported, teachers are paid less than other college-educated workers with similar experience and education. This financial penalty discourages college students from entering the teaching profession and makes it difficult for school districts to retain teachers. Based on the most recent reporting, Virginia had the largest teacher pay penalty at 67.3 cents on the dollar earned by similar college-educated workers. Funding inequities across districts exacerbate the problems for districts with lower revenues and higher student poverty. Nationally, the base salary in high-poverty districts is on average $5,600 lower than low-poverty districts, a difference of nearly 10 percent. And these differences in salary have implications for school systems’ ability to recruit and retain staff. A 2021 study of the educator labor market in Washington state examined job openings statewide and found that shortages are nearly two times higher in high-poverty districts. Using compensation to address the staffing crises means making teaching and school staff jobs more competitive with comparable jobs in the private sector. Higher pay attracts high-achieving young people to enter the teaching profession and helps keep teachers from leaving the profession. And that matters for students. Countries that pay teachers more - Ireland, Canada, and Finland for example - are able to attract teachers with stronger cognitive skills and that makes a difference for students. When teachers have higher cognitive skills, their students perform better in math and reading. Other research has found that raising teacher wages by ten percent reduces high school dropout rates by three to four percent. Virginia has the least competitive teacher pay in the country. Virginia lawmakers should take immediate steps to resolve this. Closing the pay gap between Virginia teachers and other college educated workers would mean raising the average teacher salary by 32.7%. As a step toward that goal, Virginia should raise average teacher pay by 10% to bring teacher pay levels up to the U.S. average. I hope you will join me in supporting HB 353. Thank you, Tyvon Bates American Federation of Teachers Virginia
As a public school teacher in Virginia, I urge you to vote in support of HB 535. Virginia's teacher pay is 10% below the national average and Virginia has the largest pay penalty in the country, with teachers earning on average only 67% of what our similarly educated peers earn in other fields. If Virginia wants to compete with surrounding states, it is time to bring teacher pay up to at least the national average. I appreciate Delegate Clark for sponsoring this bill and hope that you vote in favor of it.
I am a teacher in FCPS, and I personally support all of this bills. All of these bills are also part of Virginia Education Association's list of bills to support.
I applaud Del. Clark and others who have introduced HB535. During the campaign, both parties made raising teacher salaries and investing in education a keystone of their platforms. Now that the campaign is over, it's time to deliver on that promise by passing HB535.
HB547 - Speech-language pathologists; Department of Education to develop/maintain statewide strategic plan.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school-based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as autism spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Wendy Pulliam, MS, CCC-SLP pulliamwj@gmail.com
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Best, Maria McCharen, MA CCC-SLP Speech-language pathologist in Giles Co. Public Schools
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. As an educator with 35 years of service I have seen the impact high caseloads have had on the delivery and effectiveness of Speech and Language therapy. Our SLP's do an amazing job juggling so many children- but what is the cost of that? The cost is loosing high quality staff as well as decreased effectiveness of the the much needed therapy. We must lower the caseloads in order for the children to receive an appropriate level of therapy delivery. We must also lower the caseloads in order for therapists to deliver that therapy with fidelity. These therapists are tasked with delivering therapy, paperwork(documentation), collaboration with general education staff and parents along with all of their other duties within a school building. We must support these dedicated professionals and allow them to effectively execute their jobs in order to recruit and retain. Kathryn Payne Preschool/Special Education Coordinator Greene County Public Schools
I am writing in support of HB 547. The breadth of support services that school-based speech language pathologists can offer to students to improve their communication and swallowing skills is important. Our role and responsibilities are truly unique in the school districts as we work directly with the students on our caseload as specified in their IEPs. We are often the case managers for the majority of our students . As case managers, we are the main point of contact with families regarding their student's special education services. We write and carry out the student's IEP in collaboration with the student's IEP team . SLPs oversee the screening new students (for communication and hearing), conduct evaluations of students with suspected disabilities, write thorough reports of these evaluations, complete progress reports, bill Medicaid for the services we provide to eligible students, and collect and organize data for all the students on our caseload (for each session if the student is eligible for Medicaid). Our profession covers a broad range of skills and we are also obligated to stay abreast of current research and practices in our field (which encompasses language disorders, speech sound disorders, fluency differences, swallowing, voice disorders, social language, executive function skills, augmentative and alternative communication) and apply these to our daily interactions with our students. Applying evidence based practice to our work in the schools requires a good deal of specialized professional development which is often different from what would be helpful for a classroom teacher. SLP's are also called on frequently to support classroom teachers as they work with students who have any level of communication delay or disorder to better support these students in the classroom- even if the student does not qualify for speech-language services in school. With these unique roles and services, having such high numbers of students on our caseloads leads to more work than can be reasonably completed in a week. I have worked in my school division, which currently employs 5 full time and 1 part time SLP, for the past 5 years. In that time, we have had a part time position that has gone unfilled for 4 of the 5 years. In that time frame, we have also had five SLPs leave our school district. Only 1 of those 5 still works as a school based SLP in a Virginia school district. My husband regularly entreats me to look into working at a private practice rather than in the schools because of the amount of time I spend at home in the evenings and on weekends completing my work responsibilities. I am in full support of lowering the caseload cap as a way to boost recruitment and retention of qualified Speech Language Pathologists in the schools. My insight as a school-based SLP is that most of us working in the schools would prioritize having a more manageable workload than a pay increase. Every professional development conference I have attended has included at least one session targeted to preventing burnout. These types of sessions would not be necessary if burnout was not a big problem in our profession. Thank you for your support of school based SLPs and HB 547. Sincerely, Marla Bruton Speech-Language Pathologist
I would like to provide comments and data on this bill. Our SLP currently has 50 students on her caseload. She is considered 'Part Time'. Within our school, she is ONLY SLP and has to toggle between therapy sessions, Local Screening, IEP meetings, Pre-School Transition meetings, and 6th grade transition meetings. It is absolutely impossible for ONE SLP to manage all of this workload being PART TIME. She deserves to be made full-time if she is expected to fulfill her duties without it causing extreme stress in her personal and professional life. She is having to work on weekends (as many of us are) and extended holiday breaks (as many of us are). When does she have any time left to devote to her family?? As an SLP who works in the education setting and provides fantastic and desperately needed services daily, she deserves the respect of being given FULL TIME status! SLPs and other paraprofessionals should also be included when SPED teachers are given raises as well! They work with the same students and share caseloads more often that not. You will be driving wonderful and highly qualified individuals out of the educational profession if something is not adjusted. Counties across Virginia are severely lacking educations and paraprofessionals because of the demands and lack of resources handed to them. If you would like more individuals to leave the profession and dig a further hole, then do nothing. I HIGHLY suggest taking steps to remedy, or to begin the process of adjusting policies/requirements for hours ASAP.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, My name is Donna Bryant. I live in King George County and work as a speech language pathologist for Spotsylvania County Schools. This is currently my 33rd year working as a school-based speech language pathologist in Virginia. I am writing in support of HB 547 that proposes to collect data that could lead towards caseload reduction legislation for school-based SLPs. The proposed bill evaluates data for SLP staffing, recruitment and retention, tuition, differentiated pay, mentorship, and compares caseloads and compensation to neighboring states. The caseload cap for SLPs in Virginia schools is 68 students. At this point I have 62 students on my caseload. I serve students with primary speech-language impairments as well as students with autism, intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities, and developmental delays. The students typically receive services 1-3x each week. I am responsible for: • planning and collaboration with classroom teachers for each student • developing individual education plans for each student • attending meetings to review each student’s individualized education plan with parents and teachers • online documentation for each session with each student • maintaining current reevaluation data for each student • quarterly progress reports to parents on each goal for each student Although I love my students and helping them become better communicators, the workload and paperwork associated with my current caseload is significant. I spend time at home and on weekends completing schoolwork that there is not time to complete during the school day. At times, students need to be seen in groups that are larger than is optimal, to accommodate needed meetings and student schedules. When the impact of the workload associated with each student on a caseload is considered, it becomes clear that caseload reduction legislation for speech language pathologists should be a priority in Virginia. Reducing SLP caseload sizes would benefit not only the SLPs working in schools in Virginia, but also the students receiving the services by enabling reduced group sizes and increased time to address each student’s needs. Pairing this with recruitment and retention efforts would draw SLP candidates to Virginia to fill positions. I appreciate your considering HB 547, School SLP Caseload cap. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Sincerely, Donna Bryant, MS, CCC-SLP Speech Language Pathologist Spotsylvania County Schools cdbryant@va.metrocast.net
I am writing in support of HB 547. I started SLP-ing in Virginia's public schools in 1976: the Bicentennial Year & the first year of implementation of our inclusive & welcoming Individuals with Disabilities Act which families of children with disabilities had to advocate for so their children could access public education (Brown v Bd of Ed -1954 was often cited back in the early days of getting this civil rights legislation passed in a bi-partisan 94th Congress). I am now on Year 40. I received my 30 year pin from Spotsy Co PS in May 2021. I love what I do. Amber Handon with Charlottesville PS, has already sent you a comment that has the supporting reasons for you to also support Del. Hudson's HB 547. We need help with recruiting and retaining SLPs in public schools, especially full-time ones that carry the current & overwhelming 68+ caseload. It's not working to patch together some part-timers who get an hourly rate to do a few students. There's no room left in the school buildings to have part-timers coming in/out throughout the day all looking for an empty room. We're using all the rooms now. We don't want Learning Cottages on the property just to add more space, even for the 'out of state' teletherapists who are now being contracted by school systems because we can't find 'in person' Virginians to work in public schools and spend their paycheck in our communities. Those out of state teletherapists still need a room for a para to walk students into for a screen session. And as per ASHA, teletherapy is just as effective as 'in person' with a small group. Ms. Handon mentions WV and NC w- caseload caps of 50. That's our competition. Really? We can have a more reasonable caseload w- the national average of 47. The whole point of IDEA is to provide speech/language therapy for a student to access the curriculum. We want to get to remediation. Not decades of therapy because we have in/outs of SLPs with no consistency in implementation from one year to the next and/or having to group when we could do a pair-up or 1:1. I was once told by my most favorite supervisor ever: Ron Branscome, Executive Director (now retired) of the Rappahannock Area Community Services Board (Planning District 16: City of Fred, Caroline, King George, Spotsy & Stafford) that I approached my job with Urgency. I asked him, is that a good thing? He said sure. We need Urgency to get things done. This was during my years in early intervention birth - 2 yrs old which is Part C of IDEA before these infants/toddlers transition into Part B public schools, ages 2-21 yrs old. This situation with burdensome caseloads is URGENT. Virginia is the ONLY state that provides EI at age 2 yrs old (not 3 yrs old, like the other states do) It's something to be right proud of. We have age 2 yrs as our start for public school special education because the parents of the deaf children back in the 1940s advocated to the Virginia General Assembly that we 'invest' early in intervention & we get better results & more 'dismissals' because we've remediated the speech/language impairment. But we need a reasonable caseload number like the national average of 47 to be efficient with our therapy. That early INVESTMENT in a 47 in the long run saves Virginia public schools funding because reduced caseload equals smaller groups, more individualized attention to each student. And the students are out earlier. Not decades of therapy $$$
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with a wide variety of disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Our work ranges from articulation, language, social/ pragmatic skills, fluency/stuttering, feeding and students using alternative/ augmented communication systems. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Jen Johnson Speech-Language Pathologist working in Charlottesville City Schools
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school-based speech-language pathologists. ● School-based speech-language pathologists provide direct and/or consultative services to students identified with a variety of disabilities to include: developmental delays, intellectual disabilities, multiple disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, sensory disabilities, specific learning disabilities, social-emotional disabilities, vision or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries, and speech-language impairments. (Students identified with speech-language needs that impact their educational performance and require specialized speech-language services demonstrate significant needs in the areas of speech sound disorders, receptive/expressive language, pragmatics/social communication, fluency, voice, and/or functional language.) In addition to providing services to students having identified disabilities, speech-language pathologists also provide preventative support and services to students without disabilities as part of their school systems’ tiered systems of support. ● In Virginia and across the United States, there has been a shortage of school-based speech-language pathologists. Numerous districts in Virginia were unable to fill speech-language vacancies for the current 2021-22 school year, leading to higher caseloads and workloads to already overtaxed school-based speech-language pathologists. ● Virginia has a caseload cap of 68 students, and many speech-language pathologists in Virginia have higher caseloads than their counterparts in other states. For example, the bordering states of West Virginia and North Carolina both have caseload caps of 50 students. High caseload numbers undoubtedly impact Virginia’s school districts’ ability to recruit and retain qualified speech-language pathologists. Reducing the caseload cap for speech-language pathologists in Virginia would assist school districts in attracting and retaining prospective speech-language pathologists. Virginia’s current caseload cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB 547, the Virginia Department of Education will collect data to identify the needs of school-based speech-language pathologists across Virginia. VDOE will then create specific action plans focusing on the recruitment and retention of speech-language pathologists. I appreciate your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia, and thank you for your consideration of HB 547. Michelle Dombrovskis Speech-Language Pathologist Greene County Public Schools mdombrovskis@greenecountyschools.com
Please support HB 547 by voting YES! Our SLP caseloads are incredibly high and understaffed across the Commonwealth. We need to investigate this problem in depth. Thank you! Diane
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 16 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Please continue to support this important potential legislature.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Michelle Sisk, M. S., CCC-SLP Speech-Language Pathologist providing services in Campbell County
I am writing as a school-based speech-language pathologist (SLP) in Frederick County, VA. As with other special education positions, competition to recruit and retain SLPs is high, and job vacancies are not always filled (there were 93 reported full-time SLP vacancies in the fall of 2021 across schools in the Commonwealth). When personnel shortages exist, employee workloads often increase substantially, leading to burnout and further loss of personnel. Students should receive thoughtful, planned therapy services from highly trained SLPs. The results from a recent survey conducted by the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA) highlight this concern: 63% of surveyed school-based SLPs identified "lack of time to ensure the delivery of quality services to my students" as an ethical issue they had faced during the last three years (ASHA 2020 Schools Survey: SLP Workforce and Work Conditions). The current caseload cap of 68 does not account for the workload in serving 68 individual students with various disabilities and needs. Passing HB547 would ensure that the VDOE gathers needed data to implement solutions for recruiting and retaining SLPs across the Commonwealth. Thank you for your time and service. Janet Gavin Speech-Language Pathologist working in Frederick County Public Schools
Please consider the inequitable workload and responsibilities that are placed on speech-language pathologists working in the schools. Many SLPs are over stretched and are burned out as a result of high caseloads, a significant amount of special education paperwork that is considerably higher than special education teachers, time spent in countless meetings, and a lack of support from school administration and county superintendents. We need support from the statewide government in order to ensure that quality SLPs remain in VA school districts and our students' needs are met.
I am writing in support of HB 547. This bill tasks the VDOE to develop a strategic plan to recruit and retain qualified speech-language pathologists for our public schools. Just last year my county lost 20 speech-language pathologists! This service is critical for many of our students with disabilities. It can be life changing.
Currently the SLP that is working at our school has a caseload of 50 students. She is the only SLP in our building and she works Mondays-Thursdays. Sometimes she requires one-on-one sessions with them, and she also has some kids that require 4 hours per month. Not only that, she has 29 evaluations scheduled for this year, which take a minimum of 8 hours to do. Her caseloads require her to have around 80 IEPs a year! I can't imagine how this could be a job that can be done within the hours in school by one person and how this can be feasible for anyone to do without getting burnt out. We are striving as a country to tell our teachers to take care of themselves, and yet we also expect our teachers to do what is best for our students. A teacher is not capable of doing both with this type of caseload. If we care about the future of this service - that many students highly benefit from- we really need to look into creating more manageable caseloads or maybe even paying SLPs on a different type of pay scale.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. I am a special education teacher and work at an elementary school where our speech and Language Pathologist is a part-time teacher but she has a caseload of over 50 students. She is only paid to work 4 days a week but it still working on the 5th day to write reports, IEPs, and complete other paperwork. She has MANY evaluations each year that take 8-10 hours to complete. Every minute of the school day is filled with therapy, testing, or meetings. So, she has no time during contract hours to complete report writing, IEPs, speech language updates, etc. The caseloads for SLPs is unmanageable. The school SLP workload is not consistent with PT and OT or SPED teachers who have lower caseloads and workloads. However, school SLPS are on the teacher payscale and paid the same amount as other professionals with a different workload. I ask that you consider creating a manageable caseload cap for our hard-working SLPs.
I work as a speech-language pathologist for Albemarle County Public Schools. In our district, where we benefit from having the University of Virginia at our doorstep however, we still struggle annually to attract and retain SLPs. Due to our location, we frequently have spouses of UVA graduate and doctoral students that help to temporarily fill positions, and we benefit from a slightly more competitive pay. Even with these factors that many of our surrounding counties do have, we cannot fill and retain SLP positions. We have lost SLPs in the recent years due to expanded workload (with no compensation and not enough SLPs to cover the extra load). We have also lost individuals with special skill assets, such as fluency in another language, due to a lack of stipends or different salary scale to encourage individuals with these additional qualifications to stay. I urge you to pass legislation that will promote the recruitment and retention of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia schools.
As a speech/language pathologist, I urge you to support lower caseloads for public school speech pathologists through HB547. I work primarily with students with intellectual disabilities who are learning crucial skills such as using a communication device to express their wants/needs and learning basic communication skills to enhance their employability. Communication is a key factor of whether students can control problematic behaviors, be gainfully employed and possibly support themselves. Due to so many workload demands such as attending screening meetings, eligibilities, evaluations, IEP's, documentation, consultations, Medicaid billing, and planning, it is difficult to provide the services in the individualized manner that these students need. Parents regularly advocate for more services for their child but more services requires lower caseloads. A differential salary scale and lower caseloads for SLP's could attract more professionals to the field which would alleviate these difficulties. Please pass this bill as a step toward resolving this situation.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. In my personal experience, while on maternity leave recently, my district was unable to staff a temporary position to cover my leave, therefore leaving my students without services for six weeks. ● Large caseloads and low pay in comparison to Speech Language Pathologists working in other settings (i.e. Skilled Nursing Facilities, hospitals, private practices) may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists in the school setting. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Kate Worcester Speech-Language Pathologist worcester.kate@gmail.com
I currently am the Lead Special Education teacher at an elementary school. Our Speech and Language Pathologist is a part-time teacher, who works four days per week. She currently has a caseload of over 50 students, most of which are in their reevaluation year or have become newly eligible for speech and language supports and services. She has advocated that she would like to be full time, but she has not been granted a full-time position at our school. She was told that the only way that she could hold a full-time position is if she takes on a second elementary school and a second caseload. Instead, she spends the day that she is not paid to be working writing reports, IEPs, and managing other paperwork. Needless to say, she is doing the work of a full-time employee with part-time pay. Our school's principal, our speech and language pathologist, and myself have all advocated for her to be full time, but our request has been denied. As there is no current case load cap, our hard-working Speech and Language Pathologist and her peers have been slammed with too many students and an unmanageable workload. I urge you to consider creating a manageable caseload cap for these hardworking professionals.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Jessica Gleason Speech-Language Pathologist working in Charlottesville City Schools gleasonj1@charlottesvilleschools.org
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school-based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as autism spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Susan Heck, M.S., CCC-SLP Speech Language Pathologist working in Roanoke County Public Schools sheck@rcps.us
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 14 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 5 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature. Additionally, schooling to become an SLP is a longer process than to become a classroom teacher. As such, SLPs should be considered for differential payment
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Carolyn Kilday Speech-Language Pathologist working in Charlottesville City Schools crkilday@gmail.com
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
As a parent of a minimally speaking child who uses alternative and augmentative communication (AAC) to be heard, I strongly urge you to support HB547. When my child was first identified for special education services at 3 years old, the staff giving a tour of the early intervention preschool program told us that none of our children would receive speech services. Due to the severity of my child's speech needs, I assumed that would not apply to us. I was wrong. In our initial IEP meeting, we could not get the staff to agree to a speech-language evaluation. despite the fact that Infant & Toddler Connection (ITC) was already providing speech services and the ITC speech therapist was with us in the IEP meeting. We were told preschool was a language-rich environment and that would address our child's speech delay. Except our child's speech disability is due to motor planning deficits. A "language-rich environment" doesn't resolve motor planning deficits. After months of back and forth, we finally got a consultation, and that consultation only recommended one hour/MONTH of speech services. 15 minutes a week. For a child with a severe speech disability. Over the course of the next year and a half, we increased that amount to 4 hours/month, which is where we are still today. While some progress has been made, that amount is still inadequate for the severity of our child's needs and yet 4 hours a month is the unspoken cap, due to the significant staffing shortages for Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) and their overflowing caseloads. It is absolutely imperative that Virginia address the staffing shortages and impossible caseloads for ALL related service providers (including physical therapists, occupational therapists, & assistive technology specialists), but starting with SLPs would be an encouraging step forward. I have spoken to multiple families this year alone whose children were found to require AAC devices to communicate, and yet those same children were denied speech services that would facilitate learning how to *use* those devices. The denials of service that I and these other families have experienced are nonsensical and directly relate to the SLP staffing shortages and towering SLP caseloads. Students who need speech services the most are routinely denied access to them because schools do not have the SLP resources to meet their needs. I urge you to pass this bill ASAP and start Virginia on a better path to truly meet the needs of ALL students. Thank you.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 52 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 16 years. The following quote describes how all of my colleagues feel and why many leave school jobs: “It’s hard to pinpoint what the biggest issue is as a school SLP, but it really is all of the juggling. Billing, progress reports, paper data sheets, IEPs, meetings, re-evals, screenings, filing paperwork, lawyers, uninvolved parents, small work spaces, low funding, low support from school staff, lack of understanding of our role as school SLPs. I feel like if caseloads could be capped to something like 40 instead of having 60 like I do now, I’d be able to manage all of these tasks. But right now, I barely meet deadlines, my therapy is mediocre quality, and I always wish I had time/energy to give more to my kids and focus on the IMPORTANT part of the job which is treating and diagnosing speech and language disorders efficiently and in a way that is individualized to each student. It’s what they deserve and it never feels possible when it COULD BE.” https://www.slptoolkit.com/blog/dear-asha-what-school-slps-want-you-to-know/ We need help with increased staffing. You can help by incentivizing students from JMU, UVA, and Radford to stay in Virginia and work in our public schools. Please support this bill. Thank you
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 8.5 years and total experience in the profession for 15 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. We work closely with general education teachers and special education teachers to screen students with communication concerns, consult/collaborate with teachers and parents, administer comprehensive communication assessments, determine and write communication goals, provide direct service, closely monitor progress, complete progress notes, write detailed and thorough evaluation reports, write reevaluation update reports, case mange more students than special education teachers at the elementary school level, run IEP meetings, complete Medicaid paperwork, and at additionally at the elementary level: attend Multi-Tiered Systems of Support and Local Screening meetings, and provide services to students who live in Fairfax County boundaries but do not attend their local public school. The more students we work with directly, the more paperwork that is required with no assistance as compared to special education teachers would have through their instructional aides. Having a cap of 45-50 students on an SLP’s caseload would allow for smaller group sizes, thorough planning for direct services, and better medicaid documentation of direct services. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to better serve our students’ individualized needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 7 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each student's individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 2 years. I am writing this because I strongly support HB 547. School based Speech-Language Pathologists serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency, and social communication. A major issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. The current caseload cap of 68 students is not manageable. Due to high caseload size, I am required to be in more meetings (IEPs, re-evaluations, eligibilities, etc.) which results in missed therapy sessions that are difficult to make-up due to my unmanageable workload. I work many hours into the night just to get paperwork done because there is not time for me to complete it during the day. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, SLPs would be able comprehensively serve each of each of our students’ individual needs. SLPs would also be more likely to stay in their current positions without feeling burnout. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
Ever since I moved to Virginia, I have been met with extremely high caseloads. This impact my children's ability to learn and receive the time written on their IEP's. Each of my kids end up having about 10 minutes each of direct attention and instruction because most of my speech classes consist of large groups. This is unfair to me as a professional but more importantly unfair to my students.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 15 years. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year.The role of the SLP in a school includes prevention, correction, or alleviation of articulation, fluency, voice, language, and social communication impairments. We are tasked with reducing the functional consequences of communication disabilities by promoting the development, improvement, and use of functional communication skills, and we provide support in the general education environment to alleviate the social consequences of communication impairments by facilitating successful participation, socialization, and learning (ASHA, 1999). Our responsibilities include: 1. Prevention - Provides pre-referral consultations and involved in various initiatives including RtI 2. Identification - Conducts speech-language screenings; identifies if students failing screening should be referred to Child Study 3. Evaluation: Determining Need for Evaluation - Serves as member of team for students with suspected speech-language deficits 4. Evaluation: Assessment - Conducts a comprehensive assessment to determine the existence of a disability 5. Evaluation: Interpretation of Assessment - Identifies child’s communication strengths and weaknesses; prepares evaluation report 6. Eligibility Decision - Presents speech-language assessment results at team meeting; describes the student’s functional speech and language skills as they relate to the student’s ability to access the curriculum and progress 7. Individualized Education Program Development - Drafts parts of present level of performance, IEP goals and objectives/benchmarks related to speech-language impairment 8. Intervention - Provides intervention appropriate to the age and learning needs of the individual student 9. Caseload Management - Employs a continuum of service delivery models in the LRE; meets federal and state mandates as well as local policies in performance of job duties 10. Data Collection and Analysis - Gathers and interprets data for individual students as well as overall program evaluation 11. Supervision and Mentorship - Supervises university practicum students, clinical fellows, and paraprofessionals Mentors new SLPs 12. Documentation - Completes progress reports (for special education and Medicaid) 13. Collaboration - SLPs work with individuals and agencies in the community, universities, other school professionals, families, and students 14. Unique Contributions - Addresses the linguistic and metalinguistic foundations of the curriculum 15. Professional Development - Remains current in all aspects of the profession and supports the use of EBP Adapted from American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2010). Taken from “Speech-Language Pathology in the Schools”; VDOE We are often overlooked, underpaid, and disrespected, yet we continue to do our job with the highest level of professionalism because what matters most to us is our students’ progress. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this extremely important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 27 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. We provide services for at least 50-80 students and are responsible to case manage, which no other disciple does; Occupational Therapists (OT), Physical Therapists (PT), and school Psychologists. We service students from preschool through graduate transition services, while other school personnel typically service only one year. We are the only school personnel who screen, evaluate, re-evaluate, diagnose and treat students. We run the IEP process from start to finish. OT’s, PT’s, Psychs don’t, they just evaluate. SPED teachers and teachers don’t either. SLPs generate millions of funds for the districts through Medicaid reimbursement, but we must hold our National certification to do this. Our National certification is NOT rewarded by school districts, even though our training is more time consuming and intensive than the National teachers certification process, which receives a stipend from school systems for teachers. To comply with Federal guidelines, SLPs have a voluminous amount if paperwork as Case Managers for 5 times the amount of students than other Special Education or Related service providers. We don’t have assistants like Special Education teachers and general education teachers. Speech Pathologists are being grossly overworked in the schools. A caseload cap of 40-50 students is essential to allow us to provide the high quality of service delivery that we’ve been trained to do. Please help us! I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature. With thanks, Liz Bergstrom, M.S., CCC-SLP
I am a speech-language pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 17 years. School-based SLPs serve students with communication needs of varying severity levels from age 2-22. We hold Masters or Doctorate degrees, and keep up our best practices with continuing education every year in order to hold our certification. A key issue that impacts SLPs is caseload size, along with additional job requirements such as Medicaid billing, diagnostic sessions, and more. Caseload size in Virginia is enormous and does not reflect the depth and breadth of the students who require specialized communication services. We no longer are “speech correctionists”, but have to have the knowledge and time to address the proliferation of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder as well as those who are nonverbal and require an Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) device. Lowering the caseload from where it stands now would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Please take the time to consider supporting this important legislative measure. The quality of children’s lives depends on it. Thanks you.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 15 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
To Members of the House Committee on Education, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. Based in a fall 2020 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation There continues to be a need for speech-language pathologists in the schools. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia Amber Handon Speech-Language Pathologist amber.handon@gmail.com
Thank you for this opportunity to submit a brief statement summarizing why this legislation should be supported. I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for almost 12 years, and I have been working in this field for almost 20 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, expressive language, receptive language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size due to the numerous requirements for supporting each individual case and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to more comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Taking care of students with special needs and their families is at the heart of what we do and the passion upon which we SLPs thrive. Lowering caseload numbers would allow us to spend more time on the tasks that directly support students and families and maximize children's progress. Moving toward this action would also increase attraction and retention of highly skilled SLPs in the Virginia schools. Thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
Thank you for considering this important legislation. I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 22 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language (including use of augmentative communication devices,) voice, fluency and social communication. We are required to be highly qualified with a Master's Degree to serve our students. Communication is a basic human right and speech language pathologists in the school system support the development of this skill from preschool to early adulthood. As a speech pathologist who works with adolescents, I prepare students to enter secondary education or the work-force. Communication is KEY work place and educational skill. A vital issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. Our job responsibilities include scheduling, Individual Education Plan (IEP) drafting and completion, inter-professional collaboration, filing, documentation of work and billing to outside pay sources. All of the previously mentioned duties in addition to direct service delivery. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs and prepare the students to communicate effectively in all their interactions. I am grateful to Delegate Hudson, and I strongly support HB 547.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 8 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency (stuttering) and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature (HB 547).
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 6 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency, and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for over 11 years. During my career, my caseload size has dramatically increased from the low 40s range to the 60s and other job requirements (e.g. IEP/Eligibility meetings, Medicaid billing, trainings, screenings, etc.) I've been tasked with have increased as well. As a result, the quality of my therapy has suffered, my students are not getting the services they deserve, and my overall job satisfaction has greatly decreased. I'm required to be in more IEP/re-eval/eligibility meetings which has resulted in missed therapy sessions that are difficult to make-up due to my unmanageable workload. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow me the ability to comprehensively serve each of my students’ individual needs. It would also save school districts from lawsuits because students would be better supported with more planning time, more individualized care, and more parent communication. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) currently working in Virginia’s public schools. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. Many issues negatively impact Speech-Language Pathologists' ability to effectively service students' needs, though excessive caseload sizes and the increase of non-clinical job requirements are two issues of significant concern. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 2 years. I have worked in other settings as a speech langauge pathologist for over 16 years. The school position is the most challenging position I have had due to the workload (high caseload, large amount of special education paperwork and writing, high load of evaluations completed, demand to serve preschool students in addition to K-6 students, meetings, and mandated school trainings) and low compensation. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year and poor compensation. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature. Please consider a case load cap of 50 students for a full time employee, a pay raise to offer competitive and livable wage that matches our education and expertise and skill, and find other providers to serve preschool students so that school based SLPS (K-12) are not over-tasked with this need. If issues are not addressed, more SLPS will resign from the school setting to work in other settings that have a more manageable workload and better pay. The schools wil not be able to meet the needs of students withtout addressing the workload and compensation of school based SLPs.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 15 years. I have worked in 2 school districts, and both have had the same difficulty retaining SLPs, due to pay differentials and caseload maximum being too high. SLPs deserve higher pay in the public schools to compete with the pay scales of the private sector, both of which require the same state and national licensure and experience/qualifications. A smaller caseload would allow more individualized instruction and support to our highly diverse caseloads. Our students range from nonverbal/AAC users and some that require 1-1 support to students who are seen in the general education environment. We are inundated with paperwork, deadlines, meetings, and reports for EVERY student on our caseloads. It would also ease some of the scheduling difficulties/stress when there are fewer schedules to consider when forming groups for instruction. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency, social communication, and Augmentative/Alternative Communication. Thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature to ensure the best progress for our students with Speech Language Impairments.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for about 2 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. The difficulty of the work of SLPs is directly related to caseload size and over the last two years has become unmanageable. It causes the stress that people working six figure salaried jobs feel, however we are unable to afford to things that can relieve the stress as people with high paying jobs can. It causes serious burnout which affects the quality of service students on our caseload receive. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a speech-language pathologist who has worked in VA public schools for the past 7 years and I strongly support H.B. 547. In my current position, I work with students ages 2-12, with a variety of communication disorders including articulation, fluency (stuttering), language, voice, social communication, and functional communication needs. The current caseload of 68:1 is untenable for the roles and responsibilities of SLPs in public schools. A smaller caseload and workload would allow me to comprehensibly serve each student that requires my services. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting H.B. 547 and I am grateful to Delegate Hudson.
I am a speech-language pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia's public schools for over 20 years. SLPs are respected school community members who address communication disorders that impact students educationally. Developing a strategic plan is essential to address the shortage of SLPs and the challenges the public schools face in recruiting, hiring, and retaining employees. SLPs must earn a master's degree and receive licensure through the Virginia Board of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology in the Department of Health Professions. School-based SLPs hold the same license as SLPs working in private practice and medical settings. The public schools compete with private and medical employers to hire a limited number of available SLPs due to the national shortage. Addressing the caseload cap and associated workload is one action that will help attract SLPs to the public schools and assist with the retention of quality employees, thus improving services to students. In the public schools, the current workload/caseload (68:1) is not related to present best practices and does not reflect the roles and responsibilities of the school-based SLP. SLPs are highly skilled professionals delivering federally mandated services to students under IDEA. The roles and expectations of the SLP greatly expanded under IDEA in the late 1990s, and the caseloads were never reduced to reflect the increased workload. The stress of the current workload associated with a 68:1 caseload is unsustainable. The workload pressure leads to SLPs leaving the public schools for more money and less work, making it challenging for school systems to provide mandated services to students. Reducing the large caseloads and associated workload is a complex issue that must be addressed. I am grateful to Delegate Hudson, and I strongly support HB 547.
Thank you for your consideration of HB 547. I am a speech-language pathologist (SLP) with 5 years of experience working in schools, as well as three years of experience as a doctoral researcher. SLPs are valuable members of the community. We help support students who cannot produce certain sounds, students who have trouble with language (i.e., vocabulary and grammar), students who stutter, students who suffer from social/emotional/behavioral disorders, and more. I have seen firsthand many of the challenges encountered by Virginia's school-based SLPs; as our caseloads grew larger and as our responsibilities expanded, we have less time time to provide individualized services to each child with a communication disorder. These services, as you know, are mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), and the Supreme Court's ruling of Endrew v. Douglas determined that these services must be high-quality and impactful. Overly-large caseloads can negatively impact the quality of speech-language services and students' outcomes, but these large caseloads may be preventable. Part of the problem is that many of these SLP jobs are unfilled for a variety of reasons. Possible reasons include relatively low wages compared to private positions, and even the large caseloads themselves may be a factor driving SLPs away from school settings. Even SLPs who prefer school settings may be enticed to work in neighboring states, where "caseload caps" limit the student-to-SLP ratio at 50:1, which is much more manageable than Virginia's cap of 68:1. I do not claim to know the solution to these complex problems. However, I am grateful for Delegate Hudson's H.B. 547, which seeks some of the answers to these questions through a statewide strategic plan. I strongly support this bill.
HB587 - School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program; processing of applications.
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 1034. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. I have worked in two different public school systems in Virginia over 13 years, and I have seen first hand how beneficial counseling services can be to a wide variety of students. If parents are allowed to prohibit their students from accessing counseling services in the school, these students may be cut off from not only critical mental health support, but but also the academic, career, and community support that school counselors and mental health team members provide. All members of a school mental health team must undergo rigorous education before obtaining their licenses, and as such they should be trusted as the professionals they are to provide only services that they deem necessary for students well-being. I strongly urge you to let the trained mental health professionals do their jobs. Don't make students get tied in the mire of adult squibbles. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB HB1032. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. As VA Senator Peterson said on January 27 of this year, regarding a similar bill, "I don't think we should be involved in micromanaging school libraries...The problem is that you’re going to sweep up books that you don’t intend to sweep up" (Matthew Barakat, abcnews.go.com). I strongly urge you to leave the books in the libraries for the kids. They deserve to have the opportunity to decide with their own parents and personal support systems what books to read. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
Greetings, My name is Chlo'e Edwards with Voices for Virginia's Children where our mission is to improve the laws of Virginia's children, particularly those at the greatest disadvantage. We are supportive of the following bills: HB1184 (Guzman), HB582 (Roem), HB 629 (Roem), HB583 (Roem), HB 587 (Roem), HB649 (Carr). As of 2020, the number of children (0-17) and young adults (18-24) in Virginia is just above 2.6M, and yet, too many children struggle to meet their basic needs. Poverty rates in Virginia remain unchanged in the past decade. Additionally, barriers to access to services and resources still persist for families of diverse identities and that face unique challenges. Voices believes in creating just and fair futures for Virginia's children as we know that children are the future. In creasing access to services and supports for Virginia's children today to ensure they live, thrive, and survive, we are creating a brighter future tomorrow. We hope that it pleases the member of the committees to support these initiatives as there are
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
HB649 - Children who are deaf or hard of hearing; language development, assessment resources.
Please seriously consider passing HB649 for the educational success of Deaf/Hard of Hearing children in our country. They deserve to have a foundation for language on which to build there education. As an interpreter in the public school system, I have seen too many students come through the system without visual language support which is readily understood by the Deaf. Many Deaf/Hard of Hearing are born to hearing families that do not sign. We need proper assessment for equity and equality purposes. Young people who are Deaf/hard of Hearing have much to contribute to their country.
Please vote support SB 265 and HB 649. Virginia's educational system is failing Deaf and Hard of Hearing and their families that choose to use visual communication in the form of American Sign Language. From VA DOE website: (https://www.doe.virginia.gov/special_ed/disabilities/sensory_disabilities/hearing_impairment/guidelines_working_with_deaf.docx) Revised 2019 page 15, paragraph 5 . "Formal standardized measures of ASL proficiency normed on children who are deaf and hard of hearing currently are not available. " This is inaccurate, but accurate for Virginia. There ARE tools available. Our bill ensures they are used and appropriate intervention when delays identified. Listen to the people who have experienced language deprivation firsthand, not the so called school administrators and professionals who do not want to be held accountable for this failure. Nothing about us without us.
I support HB 649.
Please vote in support of HB649, which will ensure accessible communication for d/Deaf children in educational settings. Early exposure to sign language and learning concepts is key to cognitive development for deaf children.
Go for HB 649.
I am standing and support for HB 649. Don't give up.
HB649 would provide for the needed focus on language development of young children who are deaf or hard of hearing. The bill would also improve the resources needed by families of young children who are deaf. The Virginia Association of Centers for Independent Living asks that the Subcommittee support HB649.
I am speaking in favor of HB649, The Language Equality and Acquisition for Deaf Kids bill. I am the parent of a Deaf preschooler enrolled in Richmond City Public Schools and also a PhD Candidate at William and Mary where I study disability history. My daughter uses American Sign Language as well as Cochlear Implants, meaning she communicates in both sign language and spoken English. HB649 would ensure that all parents of Deaf children, whether they choose to use sign language, technology, or both, all have access to resources for understanding the linguistic development of our children. My daughter's teachers and doctors have no resources to point them toward where my daughter's sign language and spoken English should be at. They can assess her spoken language against the standard of a hearing child, but they can't measure her progress against her peers, and they have no metric for assessing her American Sign Language development. Also important to this bill is the annual report to be produced on language development in per-kindergarten Deaf children. The state must know whether its serving or failing these children. If children arrive in kindergarten without language skills, the damage has already been done. Tracking and publicly reporting on these developments is an essential mechanism for ensuring accountability of the education system, but also serves to help all parents of Deaf children understand how their child is developing. This bill affects a small part of the Commonwealth, but it affects us greatly, please pass HB649
Vote YES to HB649 - Signed and spoken languages are acquired by babies in the same way, on the same maturational timetable. A child will understand the power of non-verbal communication. Remember, American Sign Language is not just a language used by Deaf people; thousands of Americans use it to communicate (first responders, coaches, health professionals, neighbors, etc.).
Please oppose HB333. Local school boards are charged with the mission of delivering public education in their districts. Time and resources should not be spent administering savings plans for any purpose. Please pass HB649. The provisions of this bill would be real assets to students and families of the deaf and hard of hearing. Please oppose HB873. While improved school security is certainly a desirable goal, school districts should not be bound as to how best to achieve this in their districts. The disparity in funding across Virginia school districts means that many smaller, rural districts have severely limited funding sources and consequently should not be hampered with staffing micro-management that may not meet their needs. Further, other school districts may find that the presence of local law enforcement in their schools does more to create tension and erode trust than alternative security measures may depending on the dynamics within their population. Please oppose HB1024. The state and local school boards are in the business of providing a high quality education to ALL of its children. Neither the state nor local school boards should dilute funding from this mission by diverting tax resources toward the pursuit of private alternatives. If localities would not divert public safety funding to citizens who pursue private security services, why would they consider doing something similar for education? Please pass HB1179. Asian American, Pacific Islander, Latino, and Indigenous peoples are only marginally represented within social studies curricula. The establishment of an advisory committee to the executive branch in improving the representation of these populations can only be helpful in closing this gap.
Education vouchers are desperately needed in Virginia. We should not be punishing parents who wish to educate their children outside the public school system. Currently, Virginia is withholding state tax funds for purchasing curriculum to homeschooling children or for enrolling them in private schools. The public school system has been overrun with social justice warriors and liberal indoctrination instructors. Parents who do not want their children groomed to be the next generation of freedom-hating socialist-worshiping liberal mouthpieces have the right to be monetarily compensated. If the public school system insists on supplementing educational curriculum with social emotional learning and critical race theory, making children feel ashamed for the color of their skin or where their ancestors came from, the state has a moral obligation to provide vouchers and funding to parents who are against this type of abuse.
I respectfully ask that you support HB649. This legislation is vital to changing the devastating statistics regarding language deprivation among d/Deaf, DeafBlind and hard-of-hearing children. Having access to language, ensuring resources are provided for parents and tracking their language acquisition to measure their language acquisition from ages 0-5 against that of their hearing peers are all key components for kindergarten readiness and towards a happy, productive future. Thank you for you support and voting YES for HB649.
Please support these resources to help deaf and hard of hearing students.
Please support this important bill to support out deaf/hard of hearing students.
Dear Delegates My name is Jenny J5 Witteborg of Culpeper County and I am one of the three Deaf women who started LEADK VA grassroot advocacy back in 2016 with blessing of Virginia Association of the Deaf. Three relevant data to know: *0.01% Deaf/HOH at Birth and as that population grows- the generation will have newly Deafened or newly identified Deaf children. When the average generation reaches their twenties, the percentage of Deaf/HOH is around 4%. This percentage increase drastically as the generation becomes older. *95% of Deaf/hoh kids are born to hearing parents and almost 100% of them never met a Deaf person before their own child. *52% of Deaf kids are language deprived at age 5 here in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 2017 VDOE Eisenburg presented to the Virginia Disability Commission and said 52% of Deaf kids are language deprived at age 5. Language deprivation impacts is lifelong and irrevocable. Early Intervention and EHDI of Virginia has a strong institutional bias against American Sign Language and thus the services 'available' are only in spoken language. You will see/or have seen Ms Long share her 2022 experiences with her Deaf/Hard of hearing Grandson - That happened here in Henrico where VCU, EHDI, VDOE, VDBHDS, and VDDHH are within an hour's drive. What does it look like in the rest of Virginia? Let me give you some ideas: Local Education Agencies, and CSB who deal with Deaf and hard of hearing children are not required to track that Deaf child's language acquisition. Each locality will make their own decision, and NONE are REQUIRED to report to the state. So Deaf /HOH kids fall through the cracks. HB 649 requires accountability via specific English and specific ASL language acquisition assessments that the AD HOC committee will choose from EXISTING assessments in each ASL and English. HB649 AD HOC temporary for one year - is chosen by the AGENCIES not by us). Hb 649 requires that these Language assessments be offered to the Parents/families of Deaf and Hard of hearing children. ASL and English are languages. Cued speech and Listening/Spoken Language aka LSL are MODES/METHODS of visually showing English. These methods are considered tools for teaching English. Let me make it clear - HB 649 will NOT decide which language the Deaf and Hard of hearing kids are to use. This bill does not force families to do anything. Hb649 only tracks Language acquisition amongst Deaf and Hard of hearing babies until age 5 : THE CRITICAL YEARS for language acquisition. This is the first step to identifying strategies for improving Deaf kids' language acquisition. Please pass HB 649 LEADK Bill.
am a Deaf person who is a Teacher of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and a parent of a Deaf child. I am encouraging you to support HB 649/SB 265. Language tracking for Deaf and Hard of Hearing kids will enable them to be prepared to enter Kindergarten with the ability to be ready to learn. I have a Deaf daughter who is currently in college and she was fully mainstreamed and she had the same ability to learn as her hearing counterparts - she graduated #6 out of 536 students in her graduating class. The reason for her success is because she had early acquisition to language and was taught both in American Sign Language and English. Language tracking was very beneficial for her and as an educator here in Virginia, my students have come to my campus and they do not nearly have the same benefit to language acquisition as my daughter and this is heartbreaking. As studies show in 2017 that 52% of Deaf children at age 5 were language delayed and were not even prepared for Kindergarten. However, research indicates that Deaf and Hard of Hearing children have the same capacity for language learning as their hearing peers but yet they continue to arrive in Kindergarten with significant language delays. If we can provide tracking of early language acquisition for deaf and hoh children from birth to age 5, it can definitely prevent language delays and afford them the opportunity to be Kindergarten ready!!! In looking at the federal EDHI, they require all states to track language acquisition and by passing HB 649, it will be made available here in the state of Virginia. In passing HB 649/SB 265. it will comply with Individual with Disabilities Act and the Family and Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Language acquisition serves as the fundamental building block for literacy and kindergarten readiness. HB 649 will freely allow parents to choose and support which language to utilize with their child whether it be American Sign Language or English or both modalities simultaneously. The other component involves communication such as Cued Speech and l:istening and spoken language". This bill is about language acquisition as a fundamental building block for literacy and kindergarten readiness. American Sign Language (ASL) and English are both languages. Cued speech and “listening and spoken language” are communication methods for using English. As a parent and an educator, I stand firm with my beliefs in language tracking and ensuring that all Deaf and Hard of Hearing children are afforded the opportunity to be Kindergarten Ready and be able to learn alongside with their hearing peers who are Kindergarten Ready!! Depriving a child of language acquisition will impact them in the long run.. preserve the language that is made available to our Deaf and Hard of Hearing children and they will go above and beyond academically if we provide them with language acquisition from the time they are identified as Deaf or Hard of Hearing throughout their early intervention program, preschool and beyond. Do not deprive them of their opportunity to thrive in life. If my daughter was able to succeed because her parents made the choice to use both American Sign Language and English successfully, Remove that barrier and negativism that happens way too often in our Deaf and Hard of Hearing children in Virginia. You will see more success in Deaf and HOH children from birth to 5 by passing HB 649. Thanks for your time.
This is Jeanne Lavelle and am a Member at Large of Virginia Association of the Deaf. Please vote YES to HB649 bill. The LEAD-K campaign aims to end language deprivation through information to parents about language milestones and assessments that measure language achievements and data collection that holds our current education system accountable. Years of Research proved its finding that reason for illiteracy in Deaf population is the deprivation of language at age 0-5 when children’s brains are rapidly developing, but Deaf children were not given the language acquisition via ASL because parents were misinformed or never knew about the benefits of ASL. We need assessment of language acquisition to get outcomes to prevent language failure. Assessment will help parents get on the right track with their Deaf children’s language acquisition. Please support HB649 for the sake of Deaf children to assure they are Kindergarten-ready by acquiring language at the ages of 0-5.
I am a Deaf person who is a Teacher of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and a parent of a Deaf child. I am encouraging you to support HB 649. Language tracking for Deaf and Hard of Hearing kids will enable them to be prepared to enter Kindergarten with the ability to be ready to learn. I have a Deaf daughter who is currently in college and she was fully mainstreamed and she had the same ability to learn as her hearing counterparts - she graduated #6 out of 536 students in her graduating class. The reason for her success is because she had early acquistion to language and was taught both in American Sign Language and English. Language tracking was very beneficial for her and as an educator here in Virginia, my students have come to my campus and they do not nearly have the same benefit to language acquistion as my daughter and this is heartbreaking. As studies show in 2018 that 52% of Deaf children at age 5 were language delayed and were not even prepared for Kindergarten. However, research indicates that Deaf and Hard of Hearing children have the same capacity for language learning as their hearing peers but yet they continue to arrive Kindergarten with significant language delays. If we can provide tracking of early language acquistion for deaf and hoh children from birth to age 5, it can definitely prevent language delays and afford them the opportunity to be Kindergarten ready!!! In looking at the federal EDHI, they require all states to track language acquistion and by passing HB 649, it will be made available here in the state of Virginia. In passing HB 649, it will be comply with Individual with Disabilities Act and the Family and Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Language acquition serves as the funabdental building block for literacy and kindergarten readiness. HB 649 will freely allow parents to choose and support which language to utilize with their child whether it be American Sign Language or English or both modalities simultaneously. The other component involves communication such as Cued Speech and l:istening and spoken language". This bill is about language acquisition as a fundamental building block for literacy and kindergarten readiness. American Sign Language (ASL) and English are both languages. Cued speech and “listening and spoken language” are communication methods for using English. As a parent and an educator, I stand firm with my beliefs in language tracking and ensuring that all Deaf and Hard of Hearing chiildren are afforded the opportunity to be Kindergarten Ready and be able to learn alongside with their hearing peers who are Kindergarten Ready!! Depriving a child of language acquisition will impact them in the long run.. preserve the language that is made available to our Deaf and Hard of Hearing children and they will go above and beyond academically if we provide them with language acquisition from the time they are identified as Deaf or Hard of Hearing throughout their early intervention program, preschool and beyond. Do not deprive them of their opportunity to thrive in life. If my daughter was able to succeed because her parents made the choice to use both American Sign Language and English successfully, Removie that barrier and negativism that happens way too often in our Deaf and Hard of Hearing children in Virginia. You will see more success in Deaf and HOH children form birth to 5 by passing SB 649. Thanks for your time.
Hello I m writing to support HB 649 because language deprivation is life long impact. Deaf kids deserve to arrive to kindergarten with a full language .
Please support HB649 as it is time to improve our language access to our young deaf children before enter kindergarten. I am deaf and married to deaf husband .
Please move to report HB201, HB333, HB649, HB873, HB1024.
Please vote YES for HB 649 My name is Lois Herberger and I live in Springfield, Virginia. I am a deaf mother of two deaf adults and a proud grandmother of three deaf granddaughters. I grew up being the only deaf oral child in a hearing family. My daily access to communication was quite limited. I experienced oral education, lip reading and speech during both elementary and high schools in Chicago’s public school system. Interpreters weren’t available in those days. Fortunately, I met some intelligent deaf college graduates who encouraged me to go to Gallaudet. It was where I really enjoyed my classes in a totally accessible environment My two adult children had every opportunity to acquire language since their infancy. They have been exposed to both ASL and spoken language to get the best of both worlds During the early 70’s, some hearing parents and I were concerned about the language acquisition problems with some of the young children. We noticed some children had both emotional and behavioral issues. As a grandmother of three deaf granddaughters, they have been exposed to all modes of communication since birth. They are thriving well both at home and schools. All three have received honors for their academic work. They continue to have full communication access in their deaf home with lots of lively discussions on many different topics. They are able to participate in hearing sport teams Qualified interpreters are provided for them at school and college as well as sports activities The first five years of a deaf child is critical in his / her language development Oral approach is not always effective, not everyone has the same skill like play the piano. More and more hearing parents are teaching their hearing babies ASL and research has proved that they can acquire more vocabulary than the non signers. This is long overdue , the sooner we expose the babies to ASL, they will also develop literacy skills at young ages
Please support the HB 649 bill! It is critical that the bill be passed for the Deaf children to stop language deprivation and to have full access to American Sign Language in the state of Virginia! I agreed 100% with Tom Dowling's comments. I am a living proof of language deprivation. I delayed language acquisition for 13 years until I enrolled at a deaf school. So please support the bill.
Please vote yes to bill HB649 and create an equitable environment for children birth to 5 years of age.
I am in favor of HB 649 Please provide zoom link for tomorrow morning. I am deaf and I am requesting ASL interpreter. Thank you
Hello, I am a 5th grade teacher with a Master’s in Special Education. I have witnessed deaf children showing up to Kindergarten without the language to tell someone they are hungry or that they need to go to the restroom. I would like to see support for HB 649. Virginia needs to take action to make sure every deaf child has a strong language foundation. This bill will help start the process to ensure all deaf children are kindergarten ready! Please support HB649.
American Sign Language (ASL) seems to be the only language in the USA that hearing people who are not part of the Deaf, Hard Of Hearing, and DeafBlind community has control over. Hearing people have passed laws and created policies to restrict and limit the types of people allowed to learn and use ASL. That’s the reason why a large percentage of babies that are born Deaf aren't taught a language between birth and 5 years old and tend to be not kindergarten-ready. This is especially true for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, who are more likely than white children to not have any language acquisition by the age of 5, automatically making them not kindergarten-ready. That also causes them to struggle in school, socially, and with mental health issues. With my experience around currently Deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind children and adults into 2022, the struggles are still there. Vote Yes to HB649
I am in favor of this bill. Please vote YES to HB 649 Language development for children who are deaf or hard of hearing: assessment resources. Thank you for taking this into consideration
Please vote YES for HB649. My name is Melanie Williams. I am president of the Virginia Association of the Deaf (VAD). Deaf children need every opportunity to acquire language as early as possible so they will be ready for kindergarten at the appropriate age and can go on to succeed on their chosen path. They should be given exposure to both spoken language and ASL so as to receive the best of both worlds. I want to present myself as an example. I went to regular public schools. I struggled at first in elementary school, but once I understood what school was all about, I hunkered down and did very well. I went on to graduate second in my high school class. I credit my parents with giving me all the support I needed, and I had an excellent role model in my older hearing brother who was himself an excellent student. I then went to Gallaudet University where I learned ASL for the first time. When I returned home for Christmas the first time, I visited my former high school. One of the librarians I used to work with told me, "you speak much better than before." I was taken aback, but then I thought, that actually makes sense. I was quite timid in high school, which probably made me harder to understand. ASL helped me to come out of my shell and to speak up more than before. You really can't be shy with ASL! It is my strong belief that ASL helps with both spoken and signed language. Once again, I ask, please vote YES for HB649.
Please vote YES to HB649! This is long overdue and our Deaf/Hard of Hearing children need this support. Please do not ignore and begin acting as advocates for these children.
The Deaf and Hard of hearing children should have an early access to sign language such as ASL. Same as any hearing babies have access to hearinf and learn spoken languages. I lost my hearing at age of one and lost a lot of languages for three years. I finally was able to learn sign language, have speech therapy, learning to lip read and be able to be in a class room setting. It was very frustrating for me as a child growing up and missing many of the spoken languages. Please recognize the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children to get the early services and to help them to be able to succeed in life.
Vote YES to HB649. American Sign language is a critical part of our nations culture. Americans who are born Deaf and parents of Deaf children need this type of support to not only progress as individuals for a better future, but as protectors of this vital part of our nation's society.
On behalf of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, I write to express opposition to H.B. 649. This legislation would require the Department of Education and the Department for the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing to select language developmental milestones for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH), create a parent resource, and select existing tools for educators to assess language and literacy development of children who are D/HH. The bill would also create an advisory committee to recommend milestones. This legislation aims to ensure that children who are D/HH are ready for kindergarten using either American Sign Language (ASL) or English. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) is the national professional, scientific, and credentialing association for 218,000 members and affiliates who are audiologists; speech-language pathologists; speech, language, and hearing scientists; audiology and speech-language pathology support personnel; and students. Over 4,700 ASHA members reside in Virginia. ASHA strongly supports the intent of H.B. 649, which is to ensure young children who are D/HH have a strong language foundation for kindergarten readiness and academic success. ASHA also supports a family’s right to decide the most appropriate language(s) (e.g., American Sign Language, spoken language, or both), communication mode(s) (e.g., augmentative and alternative communication), and education plan for their child. However, H.B. 649 includes provisions that undermine these goals and create unnecessary and burdensome requirements that interfere with the decision-making authority of the Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) and Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Current Services for Children Who Are D/HH As it stands now, children who are D/HH can receive services through Virginia's early intervention program, which includes a variety of communication methods that suit the individual child’s needs and the family’s preferences. Those methods could include ASL, but it could also include listening and spoken language (with assistance from a hearing aid or cochlear implant), cued speech or language, or another communication method with appropriate educational support. IDEA requires early intervention programs and schools to administer a comprehensive assessment to students suspected of having a disability. The assessment team must include qualified providers trained to assess the full range of the suspected disability, including communication disorders. Evaluators must administer appropriate assessments and recommend interventions and supports based on the child’s needs and their family’s priorities. ASHA recommends eliminating the proposed advisory committee, which would advise the Department of Education on the selection of appropriate milestones for the parent resource and language assessment program. Creating an advisory committee is burdensome, unnecessary, and costly and may undermine the decision-making authority of the IFSP/IEP team, which must include professionals knowledgeable about the assessment and services needed for children with disabilities, including those children who are D/HH and their parents.
As a deaf person, I grew up first being exposed to oralism and American Sign Language later. Because my parents were invested in my education and were overly involved, my language acquisition was better than most who did not have involved parents. However, as I lost more of my hearing (I was born Hard of Hearing but later became Deaf at 8), it became harder to exist with the oral approach as I was missing out on so much in school, family life and social life. It was not until I learned American Sign Language at the age of 10 where my world opened up. My vocabulary and language improved greatly. By learning American Sign Language, I was able to understand English better. I became more confident in myself and "found myself" by interacting with other deaf peers who communicated in ASL as well in a summer camp. I was one of the lucky ones, with my parents invested in my education and fighting for me. Prior to learning ASL, I had a life where I followed everyone, did not have my own opinion, and just took everything at face value. There was no real personality behind my face as I was closed off to access to all information. Everything was in a robotic fashion and I had headaches every single day. I remember coming home from school, crying, almost on a daily basis. Now, I have been signing ASL for approximately 40 years, give or take. It is my primary means communication. My hearing children sign. I am a licensed clinical social worker, working primarily with the Deaf and Hard of Hearing population. In my line of work, I have seen children and adults who come from all walks of life, and the one common thread I see is that the lack of language acquisition before the age of 5 makes a tremendous negative impact on their psychosocial and mental health. That interferes in the way these individuals navigate life, and contribute to society that is beneficial for everyone involved. Not to mention that there is a shortage of qualified mental health professionals who communicate in ASL, to help them navigate life. Fighting about how to educate Deaf and Hard of Hearing children is taking up a lot of the time that could be focused instead on providing ASL to DHH children first, so that these children can have access to learning what their hearing peers are learning in school. Then, you can focus on adding speech or whathaveyou, as long as they have a valid language, which has years of documents proving that ASL is the real language of deaf people. There are research papers and scientific facts that show the benefit of exposing DHH children to American Sign Language. Like it did for me, it opened doors. These DHH children need their doors opened. As a deaf child growing up isolated before learning American Sign Language,I beg you to sign this bill. There are many DHH adults like me, who have gone through similar experiences. Please know that there are people who claim that one can be successful being oral, without learning ASL and having great language acquisition. That is an exception, a rare exception. We should not focus on that exception, to generalize that it will work for all DHH children. Research and experience show us how learning American Sign Language early on, with parents' involvement (learning ASL too) has the most positive and beneficial impact. With language development, kids have better mental health. Thank you for reading this lengthy comment. Please pass this bill.
I fervently support this bill for language access for Deaf and hard of hearing kids.
PLEASE Vote YES on HB 649!
I am a retired teacher. I came from a hearing family. They took me to a speech school at age of 3 and I learned to lipread. My parents did not k ow anything about sign language but ABC finger spelling only. We communicated by writing pad. I wish they knew sign language had somebody told them. Exposing sign language immediately to babies after birth is a best method because babies watch everything that move and visually. Their language acquisition pick up and as a result reading levels would be on right track, not delayed. Parents think their choice is to teach children speech. If they see data showing sign language is key to language development they would feel better for their children knowing that their children have tools to go out into the world independently . They can talk to hearing population through technology resources like texting. Because their language development is set to a good start. It’s important that sign language or American Sign Language as my preference is available , not just speech.
I ask you to support HB649. Across the Commonwealth, there continue to be high numbers of deaf children at risk for language delays, and far too many deaf children arriving to kindergarten without a language foundation for literacy development. Birth to age five is a critical developmental period for a child’s brain development, and language delays during that critical time lead to poor reading outcomes, lower graduation rates, psychosocial problems, and higher rates of unemployment later in life. The statistics are there. Let this be the General Assembly that can do something about it.
Greetings, My name is Chlo'e Edwards with Voices for Virginia's Children where our mission is to improve the laws of Virginia's children, particularly those at the greatest disadvantage. We are supportive of the following bills: HB1184 (Guzman), HB582 (Roem), HB 629 (Roem), HB583 (Roem), HB 587 (Roem), HB649 (Carr). As of 2020, the number of children (0-17) and young adults (18-24) in Virginia is just above 2.6M, and yet, too many children struggle to meet their basic needs. Poverty rates in Virginia remain unchanged in the past decade. Additionally, barriers to access to services and resources still persist for families of diverse identities and that face unique challenges. Voices believes in creating just and fair futures for Virginia's children as we know that children are the future. In creasing access to services and supports for Virginia's children today to ensure they live, thrive, and survive, we are creating a brighter future tomorrow. We hope that it pleases the member of the committees to support these initiatives as there are
Please vote "yes" to HB649, D/deaf children need language access. If we don't assess milestones, how will we know they are receiving adequate access to language? The situation is a dire one that calls for intervention. Please vote "yes."
Vote YES on this bill! As a deaf person and a recently retired teacher of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing for over 30 years, I have seen first hand the effects of language deprivation on my students as well as many of my peers, who were mostly brought up in an oral environment and not exposed to American Sign Language until their adult years . Early exposure to an accessible language will go a long way in giving our deaf children the ability to reach their full potential .
Hello. Please vote YES for HB 649. I am one of the deaf Adult with hearing parents. 95 percent who born deaf with hearing parents. I can not imagine if those who have language deprivation like me. It felt embarrassed. I don't want to see the kids are embarrassed if they are behind their language. When I took SOL test by third grade, I look up the strategy they brought up in the comments. I was struggled with it. It was lower than hearing kids. It should be equal with deaf or hard of hearing kids. It have to be taught earlier so those kids would be better and feel proud themselves. I think of the kids what they needs not just strategies or cost of the money. Again Please vote YES for HB 649.
Language acquisition is definitely essential to lifetime success for ages 0 - 5 who are Deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind. HB649 helps to bridge the gap for them to become successful in kindergarten-ready. Please vote YES for HB649.
To our delegates elected to represent the people of our state, I am writing in support of HB647 regarding language acquisition for deaf and hard of hearing children. As an Educational Interpreter for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in our state’s public school system, this is very near and dear to my heart, and to my profession. Every year I am tasked to work with students, most of whom are significantly behind their grade-level counterparts who have full language access in their homes and in the community. These deaf and hard of hearing students arrive to the public schools and are expected to learn language from their interpreter while being able to learn classroom content. It is unrealistic. It is a broken pathway riddled with added extras that the student who are learning in spoken English do not experience, such as the amount of time absconded from these students’ lives, academic classes, etc… regarding most speech therapy/hearing therapy sessions which, in my observations in over ten years in the schools, appears to set these students even farther behind as they miss content in favor of ‘speech.’ Speech is not equivalent to language, it is merely a modality for expressing language. Academic learning and social learning do not show progress until there is a LANGUAGE foundation to build on. As a community member, tax payer, voter, and professional in the field, I feel that HB647 is an excellent start to developing more equity in the education of the deaf and hard of hearing students in our state; academic education, linguistic education, and social education. Language deprivation has been shown over and again to have strong, negative impacts on overall happiness and success of those impacted. Please vote YES on HB647 and improve access to language, culture, life, education, and overall success of the deaf children in Virginia. Thank you., Debbie North
I want to support legislation providing service to deaf and hard of hearing children, birth to 5 years, so that they can receive both oral and sign language opportunities and be prepared to enter kindergarten ready to learn. Respectfully, Beth Tubbs Ford
I vote a resounding yes in support of HB649. Deaf and Hard of Hearing children need to have all opportunities possible for language acquisition so they can be on par with their peers upon entering Kindergarten.
VOTE YES - Language Deprivation is a serious problem with our Deaf and Hard of Hearing students. With the increase number of cochlear implants, that often discouraging sign language, we are seeing more and more kids 5-10 years behind on language. The first five years of a child's life is THE MOST critical time for them to acquire language. We are working twice as hard to try and catch them up with their peers but often it is too late because there are permanent gaps in their language that cannot be fixed. Please help support our kids and end language deprivation for our students.
Please vote YES on the bill HB649 to support all Deaf and Hard of Hearing kids to have access American Sign Language (ASL) for their education.
I am in full support of HS 649. For too long we have neglected our Deaf and Hard of Hearing children's language development.
To our delegates elected to represent the people of our state, I am writing in support of HB647 regarding language acquisition for deaf and hard of hearing children. As an Educational Interpreter for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in our state’s public school system, this is very near and dear to my heart, and to my profession. Every year I am tasked to work with students, most of whom are significantly behind their grade-level counterparts who have full language access in their homes and in the community. These deaf and hard of hearing students arrive to the public schools and are expected to learn language from their interpreter while being able to learn classroom content. It is unrealistic. It is a broken pathway riddled with added extras that the student who are learning in spoken English do not experience, such as the amount of time absconded from these students’ lives, academic classes, etc… regarding most speech therapy/hearing therapy sessions which, in my observations in over ten years in the schools, appears to set these students even farther behind as they miss content in favor of ‘speech.’ Speech is not equivalent to language, it is merely a modality for expressing language. Academic learning and social learning do not show progress until there is a LANGUAGE foundation to build on. As a community member, tax payer, voter, and professional in the field, I feel that HB647 is an excellent start to developing more equity in the education of the deaf and hard of hearing students in our state; academic education, linguistic education, and social education. Language deprivation has been shown over and again to have strong, negative impacts on overall happiness and success of those impacted. Please vote YES on HB647 and improve access to language, culture, life, education, and overall success of the deaf children in Virginia. Thank you. Tanya Hardee, Educational Interpreter for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, EIPA 4.3
It is imperative that deaf children be taught to communicate in an appropriate language (sign language and Cued Speech for example before entering Kindergarten. Currently, most are expected to learn lip reading which is rarely successful and then when they enter kindergarten and are expected to start learning academics they must also be learning language because they can’t use lip reading successfully as a means to understand everything that is going on in the classroom. That is not fair to these children. They have just as much a right to have equal access to education which means having the appropriate level of communication in order to start learning academics (aka SOLs). Lip reading can then be taught by the Speech and Language Therapist on a weekly basis.
Language acquisition is essential to lifetime success. Those of all ages who are deaf or hard of hearing are at a disadvantage in an oral society. HB649 helps to bridge the gap for the youngest of those. Please vote YES for HB649.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
The Virginia Council of Administrators (VCASE) opposes this HB649. We respect the heartfelt and powerful stories that are provided to the committee regarding that challenges attaining language milestones, but the process in this bill is not the avenue that will provide a balance solution to these challenges. Please consider the following and ask that this bill be passed by indefinitely: THE JOINT COMMISSION ON HEALTH CARE IN 2020 STUDIED THESE PROPOSALS IN DEPTH AND THE STUDY SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED BEFORE NEW LEGISLATION IS CONSIDERED Here is the FULL REPORT: https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2020/RD331/PDF THERE ALREADY EXIST ROBUST AND COMPREHENSIVE STANDARDS AND MILESTONES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND LANGUAGE There exist multiple resource regarding language & communication in “Virginia’s Unified Early Learning and Development Standards (ELDS) (pp.37-47) provide all early childhood providers (i.e., parents/families, caregivers, educators, and program leaders) with a resource for understanding what children should know and be able to do as they grow and change from birth until they enter kindergarten.” VIRGINIA JUST TOTALLY REORGANIZED EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION TO UNIFY, NOT SEGREGATE CARE AND EDUCATION FOR OUR YOUNGEST CHILDREN In 2020, the Virginia General Assembly passed legislationThis link takes you out of the Virginia Department of Education website directing the Board of Education (BOE) to establish a unified public-private system for early care and education, administered by the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). This included the requirement that the VDOE complete the following actions by July 2021: Move oversight for all early childhood care and education programs to the VDOE, Establish a new Early Childhood Advisory Committee, and Create a Uniform Measurement and Improvement System. The Advisory committee includes representatives from the disability community THERE ALREADY EXIST FORUMS THAT HAVE AND IN THE FUTURE CAN ADDRESS LANGUAGE MILESTONES AND THE NEEDS OF CHILDREN WHO ARE DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING> The Disability Commission provides a vehicle for advancing budget proposals and addressing policy issues within a vision for a service system that seeks to maximize the self-sufficiency of Virginians with physical and sensory disabilities. The Dept of Education The Department of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Because there already exist robust language and developmental milestones and because there are existing forums to advocate for children who are deaf and hard of hearing regarding how universal milestones can be attained, VCASE Opposes this bill. Thank you, Dr. Mike Asip
HB 649 is a great first step in combating language deprivation in deaf and hard of hearing kids. I fully support it.
To Whom It May Concern, I am advocating the bill of HB 649 about the deaf children's natural language acquisition of American Sign Language (ASL). The role model of Deaf Adults is very important for a young Deaf child because they can relate to the experience of being Deaf and can easily learn ASL fluently. Who is better to assess the language acquisition of a young Deaf children? The Deaf Adult who can assess and are fluent in how far the child can progress the American Sign Language. Most professionals who are not Deaf and are not always fluent in ASL. It is a common knowledge that non-deaf who works with a deaf children missed several important steps. The first step - It is allowing a child to thrive in a environment that they can SEE and learn American Sign Language from the people they can relate to - the Deaf Adults. The second step - The Deaf children will learn more vocabulary of signs from Deaf Adults than non-Deaf professionals. The third step - The Deaf children will have a Deaf role model to increase their confidence as they become adult. The links below will help you understand the current research on young deaf child learning ASL. Also, it mentioned three discoveries that improves a young deaf children who exposed ASL very young to get a better education they deserve. https://vl2.gallaudet.edu/research Again, I cannot emphasize enough to have a Deaf Adult involve in assessing a young Deaf child language development and acquisition. The Deaf children will thrive in a education environment by watching the Deaf Adult who is fluent in ASL. It is accessible for the Deaf children's future education. Thank you for your time and attention.
Hello Chairman and committee members, I am a sign language interpreter and a member of Virginia Association of the Deaf. I am supporting HB 649 on behalf of the deaf children and young adults that I have met who did not have full access to language acquisition in their early years and as a result have struggles with reading, academics, communication, and self expression. Please vote yes on HB 649 to support early language learning for deaf and hard of hearing children in Virginia, so they can all arrive to kindergarten ready to learn and able to thrive! Thank you. Katherine Malady
My name is Tom Dowling from Fairfax VA. I’m a member of Virginia Association of the Deaf (VAD). I’m a proud parent of two deaf adults. Please support the bill (HB 649) which focuses on deaf and hard of hearing children between birth and age five years old. At a VA Disability Commission meeting in 2017, VA DOE Assistant Supt, Dr. Eisenberg testified that 52% of deaf and hard of hearing children were performing BELOW age expectation in acquisition of knowledge (such as literacy skill). 90% of all deaf and hard of hearing are born to hearing parents. Following the state data, I haven’t seen any progress to improve these outcomes since 2017, by either VA DBHDS or VA DOE. It is a great disappointment. While the majority of deaf and hard of hearing population are victims of language deprivation in early childhood, we see that deaf and hard of hearing children are still being ignored or neglected or abandoned by the school system today. We ask VA DBHDS and VA DOE together to track early language development through support to parents and professionals that work with Deaf/HH children! We will be proud to see if they reach their kindergarten level as their peer group. Show us the new data now!
Dear Delegates My name is Jenny J5 Witteborg of Culpeper County and I am one of the three Deaf women who started LEADK VA grassroot advocacy back in 2016 with blessing of Virginia Association of the Deaf. Three relevant data to know: *0.01% Deaf/HOH at Birth and as that population grows- the generation will have newly Deafened or newly identified Deaf children. When the average generation reaches their twenties, the percentage of Deaf/HOH is around 4%. This percentage increase drastically as the generation becomes older. *95% of Deaf/hoh kids are born to hearing parents and almost 100% of them never met a Deaf person before their own child. *52% of Deaf kids are language deprived at age 5 here in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 2017 VDOE Eisenburg presented to the Virginia Disability Commission and said 52% of Deaf kids are language deprived at age 5. Language deprivation impacts is lifelong and irrevocable. Early Intervention and EHDI of Virginia has a strong institutional bias against American Sign Language and thus the services 'available' are only in spoken language. You will see/or have seen Ms Long share her 2022 experiences with her Deaf/Hard of hearing Grandson - That happened here in Henrico where VCU, EHDI, VDOE, VDBHDS, and VDDHH are within an hour's drive. What does it look like in the rest of Virginia? Let me give you some ideas: Local Education Agencies, and CSB who deal with Deaf and hard of hearing children are not required to track that Deaf child's language acquisition. Each locality will make their own decision, and NONE are REQUIRED to report to the state. So Deaf /HOH kids fall through the cracks. SB 265 requires accountability via specific English and specific ASL language acquisition assessments that the AD HOC committee will choose from EXISTING assessments in each ASL and English. SB 265 AD HOC temporary for one year - is chosen by the AGENCIES not by us). SB 265 requires that these Language assessments be offered to the Parents/families of Deaf and Hard of hearing children. ASL and English are languages. Cued speech and Listening/Spoken Language aka LSL are MODES/METHODS of visually showing English. These methods are considered tools for teaching English. Let me make it clear - SB 265 will NOT decide which language the Deaf and Hard of hearing kids are to use. This bill does not force families to do anything. SB 265 only tracks Language acquisition amongst Deaf and Hard of hearing babies until age 5 : THE CRITICAL YEARS for language acquisition. This is the first step to identifying strategies for improving Deaf kids' language acquisition. Please pass SB 260 LEADK Bill.
Help us END language deprivation for all Deaf, Hard of Hearing, and DeafBlind Children in Virginia!
I agree with Ms. Alonzi's comments. In 2019, legislators made the decision to refer a previous but very similar version of this bill to the Joint Commission on Healthcare for a full study. At the conclusion of the extensive study, the Commission recommendation was that NO ACTION be taken. Links here: POWERPOINT: http://jchc.virginia.gov/Young%20Deaf%20Hard%20of%20Hearing%20Children%20Study.%20VDOE%20update.pdf FULL REPORT: https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2020/RD331/PDF Please vote NO on SB 649
I am a Judy Alonzi and a teacher of the deaf and hard of hearing in early intervention. I ask that you vote 'no' on HB 649. I thank you kindly for this opportunity to submit comments as I am working during the day serving this very population of young infants and toddlers with hearing loss with their families. I serve this population along with many other talented colleagues that use ASL and/or spoken English. We DO track the progress of each and every child with hearing loss along with their families at every visit, and are required to document in a child's file. We are also re-evaluating at every visit if adequate progress is being made and what additional supports are needed to help meet goals and outcomes that the families have identified supported by provider input. Hearing loss presents on a spectrum, I serve children with a mild, unilateral hearing loss all the way to bilateral profound hearing loss. This bill has been brought before the general assembly 5 times and each time 'no action' was determined. It was studied by the Joint Commission on Health Care in the summer of 2019, and that lengthy and costly study also determined that no action was needed. We also have 2 wonderful resources at our disposal that are state supported. *The Virginia School for the Deaf and Blind (VSDB) has over a 10 million dollar state operating budget and they are solely dedicated to ASL. They provide not only services, but professional development, webinars, useful resources and *Virginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. (VDDHH) This agency is also dedicated to serving deaf and hard of hearing individuals that use ASL. Substantial money is already spent in the state of Virginia for ASL support, and for that we are very fortunate. We also have state support with the Partnership for People with Disabilities, The infant and Toddler Connection of Virginia, the Department of Education, and more. Thank you for the opportunity to present in writing and please vote 'no' on HB 649
Vote YES on HB 649
HB650 - School boards; school consolidation and redistricting and pupil assignment, etc.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
HB688 - School boards; production of public records, fee schedules.
My name is Deborah Wahlstrom and I am a Suffolk citizen. Thank you for allowing me to provide input to HB 688 – a bill I support and encourage you to pass. I come to you this morning with wide experiences in helping schools and school divisions improve in their operations and academic achievement. I’ve seen loads of central offices and the impact of decisions made by school boards around Virginia and other parts of the country. I believe it is important to recognize that generally speaking, most school boards are not aware of the Freedom of Information Act and what it means. Because the topic is left out of most division and school-level leadership courses, we have superintendents, central office staffs, and building-level staff who have not learned that public documents are well, public. One of the consequences of filing a FOIA request is being charged an amount of money – and this amount is usually arbitrary. In Suffolk, I was charged over $600.00 dollars to get a list of people and topics for FOIA requests. I don’t mind paying fees, but it doesn’t make common sense to be charged so much for something’ the school division should have had on hand – as FOIA requests are also FOIABLE. The cost is arbitrary as are the citizens who must pay for public information. The current law provides some guidance, but not enough such that fees are consistent from one FOIA requester to the next. Each school division is required to have a FOIA officer and it seems that part of that person’s job is to provide responses to FOIA requests. There does not need to be a fee for all requests and there certainly needs to be consistency of FOIA fees in a school division. For these reasons, I wholeheartedly support HB 688. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
Please vote Yes on HB 988. It is not equitable to charge the public exorbitant amounts for 'public information' and is discriminatory against those with few resources.
HB741 - Annual public elementary and secondary school safety audits; creation or review of school building.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
The VACP highly supports HB 741, which mandates that all public schools create detailed floor plans for each school building. Although the bill states detailed and accurate floor plans, this is not clearly defined. Language should be included that would more clearly determine what is acceptable. Language should also be added to include that the mapping data is made accessible to local public safety agencies., and that agencies are provided updated mapping data each year. When critical incidents occur inside school buildings, such as an active shooter incident, seconds count. Having a detailed and accurately LABELED floor plans can make a tactical response more swift and effective. This can mean the difference between lives being saved. This mapping data is necessary regardless of whether an SRO works in a school or not. Ideally these floor plans should be labeled by room {name and/or number), entrances, stairways, etc. The detail is critical for first responders in emergency situations. These maps can also be used from incident command posts to direct safe areas, points of egress, etc. Amazing technology exists that could be instituted and ensure consistent mapping data is captured across all of our VA schools. This data needs to be in the hands of public safety and loaded in their computers and phones so it is readily accessible and can be used while in a vehicle or on foot via smart phone. Trying to find a paper map in a supervisor's vehicle in an emergency is not effective when seconds count. From a mutual aid perspective, having this data sharable would also enhance response from outside agencies.
HB863 - Local law enforcement; certain reports to school principals and division superintendents.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I would like to voice my support and urge the need for bill 863. Here in Loudoun we have seen 1st hand what happens due to vaugness in the law. After a sexual assualt at a high school in May our local sheriffs office launched a investigation. A arrest was made in July and that arrest, by law, should be reported to the superintendent. However without clear responsibility of who is suppose to report it, clear info on how it is to be reported, and requirements of a paper trail there is some doubt if it was. The Sheriff said the courts reported it. The courts have stayed quiet. And the superintendent says he was never alerted. The law doesn't say how it is to be reported so we are stuck in two community leaders pointing fingers at each other. Without the sheriff reporting the arrest (which should be reported by the office who made the arrest in my opinion), the superintendent could not take action. The end result was a 2nd victim months later, and the two community leaders pointing fingers at each other and a community of parents, including myself, having to decide who is lying and who to trust to keep our kids safe. Please fix the ambiguity and require strict rules on how law enforcement should report these types of events and what paper trail should be kept to ensure accountability. Thanks Todd Kaufman
As a Loudoun County resident and the parent of students in LCPS, as well as a constituent of Del. Reid, I ask you to strongly consider HB 863 to require written documentation and communication between school principals and law enforcement regarding offenses potentially committed by students. It is frankly shocking that this is not already a requirement.
HB1034 - School boards; guidelines for the provision of counseling services in public schools.
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 1034. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. I have worked in two different public school systems in Virginia over 13 years, and I have seen first hand how beneficial counseling services can be to a wide variety of students. If parents are allowed to prohibit their students from accessing counseling services in the school, these students may be cut off from not only critical mental health support, but but also the academic, career, and community support that school counselors and mental health team members provide. All members of a school mental health team must undergo rigorous education before obtaining their licenses, and as such they should be trusted as the professionals they are to provide only services that they deem necessary for students well-being. I strongly urge you to let the trained mental health professionals do their jobs. Don't make students get tied in the mire of adult squibbles. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB HB1032. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. As VA Senator Peterson said on January 27 of this year, regarding a similar bill, "I don't think we should be involved in micromanaging school libraries...The problem is that you’re going to sweep up books that you don’t intend to sweep up" (Matthew Barakat, abcnews.go.com). I strongly urge you to leave the books in the libraries for the kids. They deserve to have the opportunity to decide with their own parents and personal support systems what books to read. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I strongly oppose HB 1034 and encourage the subcommittee to vote "NO." Children deserve to seek counseling and help without the possibility of being stopped by a parent or guardian. I fully support parental rights, but not every child in the Commonwealth comes from a steady home and has parents with their best interest at heart. The passing of this bill would assure that those children are not able to seek help.
Both I (a public school teacher in Fairfax County Public Schools) and the Virginia Education Association OPPOSE HB 1034. This bill limits a students ability to seek counseling and confidential help based on their parent's approval. This bill will HARM children who may no longer be able to seek outside help from a bad situation at home.
HB1352 - Private elementary and secondary schools; retaliation for good faith reports of child abuse.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
HB89 - Disorderly conduct in public places; provisions shall not apply to student in grades kindergarten-8.
My name is Daniel Irwin and I am writing in opposition to HB89, which would effectively allow schools to charge students with disorderly conduct if the offense occurs on school property. I have been working in schools for close to 20 years and working with students with significant challenging behaviors. I cannot stress enough how ineffective and harmful this bill can be. First, there is no provision for students with disabilities or students in mental health crisis. There are a variety of reasons that students engage in disruptive behavior and the threat of criminal charges is not likely to change them. Schools exist to support students, not just academically, but socially, emotionally, and behaviorally as well. Students who act out at school need support, not further punishment. They are children. Stop criminalizing trauma. Stop criminalizing mental health needs. This bill sets the stage for further criminalization of minority students, specifically black students. Black students are already 4.5 times more likely to be suspended than white students. Black students make up 22% of the school population, but 52% of suspensions statewide. Black individuals also make up a disproportionate share of the incarcerated population. Why would we want to speed up the school to prison pipeline? Disorderly conduct is a loosely defined concept that is wide open to interpretation/ misinterpretation. It is just another opportunity for students to encounter consequences that are not likely to have a positive impact on their lives. This is a poorly crafted bill that provides schools with another punitive option that will do very little to change student behavior and will likely damage the relationship between the school and student. Schools have the capacity to issue suspensions, expulsions and other punitive procedures. These procedures are often ineffective "strategies" to change behavior. By eliminating the exemption for students in this bill, you are sending the message that a bigger or more severe punishment is what is needed. It is not. Students need supportive communities, comprehensive mental health support, family support, and instruction in social emotional learning so that they can develop skills to manage emotions and behavior. Further, teachers need more resources to support students in this way, This includes professional development, social emotional curriculum, and embedded school support that address the underlying causes of disruptive behavior. School teams should be empowered to develop plans to support students through a responsive tiered system of supports including functional behavior assessment and behavior intervention plans. The science of behavior has come a long way and it should be utilized. All behavior happens for a reason. It is our job as educators to find the reason and help students develop healthy, appropriate means for getting their needs met.
I am outraged that HB89 was resurrected as a substitute. The disorderly conduct charges to be reported under this bill to Law Enforcement and the HB4 that will report ALL incidents to law enforcement leaves every student in a behavioral health crisis being sent to the Juvenile Justice System. There is no protection for Autism students or DD or mental health crisis. You are throwing these children out along with their education. VOTE NO on HB89 and stop this ridiculous action.
I plead with the reconsideration of this bill. It is unfair, ridiculous, ludicrous and unbelievable in this days and age when is to be recognized that a person’s behavior is not always in their control. My own son is a brilliant young man fully invested in academics and the world around him. However he is also a nonspeaking autistic epileptic and there are times of extreme stress and/or fear when regardless of Alternative/Augmented means of communication he would NOT be able to easily and readily communicate this and would perhaps only have behaviors as a means of conveying his distress. He is actually part of the Marcus Alert program that is working to educate police and EMTS to medical and psychological behaviors in certain instances and to not have then escalate to needing any type of legal action be involved. And change IS HAPPENING! How can it possibly be that our state is considering going BACKWARDS in this? Shame shame shame. Please do what is needed d to be fair and just for all citizens especially those that have such a hard and challenging time having their very important and critical voices being heard! Thank you for your true and honorable consideration.
VOTE NO on HB89 This Bill WILL unintentionally place students and families into the courts when the issues can be resolved within the school environment. Students who struggle with honoring norms and expectations need support, services, and resources. The definition of disorderly conduct is vague and can be used punitively by school resource officers or school staff against a student. If something arises from a crime, there is a punishment that can be had outside of disorderly conduct. In 2015 Virginia was publically shamed for its treatment of children when it was ranked top in the Nation for sending students into the court systems. (https://publicintegrity.org/education/virginia-tops-nation-in-sending-students-to-cops-courts-where-does-your-state-rank/). HB89 will do away with all the hard work of ensuring that schools are safe spaces for ALL children. Including those with developmental and environmental weaknesses which need resources and not punishment. HB 89 will target black and brown students for police involvement and does nothing to engage the positive community and school relationships. This Bill will set up Virginia for federal class-action discrimination law suites. Schools should engage with parent and community resources to develop and implement corrective and restorative plans rather than throwing children into juvenile justice services. There are NO protections for children with mental health issues, students with autism, or disabilities. This Bill, along with HB4, which requires principals to report incidents to Law Enforcement, is waging war on students and criminalizing student behaviors. There is no research or evidence that supports criminalizing a student's behaviors keeps school safe or changes the students' behaviors. Please read the below testimony, which provides additional resources on WHY you should vote NO on HB89 https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/12-12-12TeskeTestimony.pdf Please show compassion for our most vulnerable members of society, our children, and VOTE NO on HB89. Cheryl A Poe Executive Director Advocating 4 Kids, Inc
VOTE NO on HB89 Students do not need to be sent to the Juvenile Justice system for conduct that should be handled by school staff. The definition of disorderly conduct is vague and can be used punitively by school resource officers or school staff against a student. If something arises to a crime there is a punishment that can be had outside of disorderly conduct. A student can be given in-school suspension or out of school suspension or expulsion—Handle this conduct inside the schools. Schools should engage with parent and come up with a plan rather than throwing them into juvenile justice services. There are NO protections for children with mental health issues or students with autism or students with disabilities. This bill along with HB4 which requires principals to report incidents to Law Enforcement is waging war on students and criminalizing student behaviors.
I am outraged that this HB89 was resurrected as a substitute. The disorderly conduct charges to be reported under this bill to Law Enforcement and the HB4 that will report ALL incidents to law enforcement leaves every student in a behavioral health crisis being sent to the Juvenile Justice System. There is no protection for Autism students or DD or mental health crisis. You are throwing these children to the dogs and destroying anyone wanting to go to public schools... oh wait, I guess I connected the dots. So you will remove any funding for private special education students to go to private schools and send them back to home public schools and self contain them (SB356). Funnel all neurotypical students to private school placements by making anyone in public school subject to Law Enforcement and then what? When does this stop? VOTE NO on HB89.
VOTE NO on HB89 Students do not need to be sent to the Juvenile Justice system for conduct that should be handled by school staff. The definition of disorderly conduct is vague and can be used punitively by school resource officers or school staff against a student. If something arises to a crime there is a punishment that can be had outside of disorderly conduct. A student can be given in-school suspension or out of school suspension or expulsion—Handle this conduct inside the schools. Schools should engage with parent and come up with a plan rather than throwing them into juvenile justice services. There are NO protections for children with mental health issues or students with autism or students with disabilities. This bill along with HB4 which requires principals to report incidents to Law Enforcement is waging war on students and criminalizing student behaviors. both are trrble nnd garbage get rid of them please!!!!!!
As a mother and teacher of children with disabilities, PLEASE DO NOT allow HB89 to stand without exceptions for those with mental health problems and disabilities!!! If my son was to act out and be charged with disorderly conduct and sent to a detention center, when the behavior is a manifestation of his disability, it would cause irreparable harm and only lead to further behavioral and academic issues. I have been attacked as a teacher and I would have never wanted that child to go to jail! They need mental health services NOT to be put into the system. This bill is outrageous and should be immediately shut down!
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I am a teacher in Fairfax County and I am writing to urge you to vote no on HB 89. This bill criminalizes student behavior and exacerbates the school-to-prison pipeline. Students of color and students with disabilities would be disproportionately negatively impacted by this bill. Instead of increasing the presence of law enforcement in our public schools, please instead focus on getting students the mental health support they need by staffing counselors, psychologists and social workers at the ratios recommended in the SOQs and lifting the support staff cap. Please vote no on this bill.
As the mother of a child with Autism, I strongly urge the Education Committe to vote "NO" on HB89! This bill will harm our children and criminalize their behavior.
I strongly urge the Education Committee to vote "No" on HB 89. I am a speech-language pathologist with years of experience working in public schools, and I have also co-authored research manuscripts about communication disorders in youth offenders. Whereas only one in thirteen children have a condition called "Developmental Language Disorder" which impacts their ability to communicate and comprehend, this disorder is prevalent in over 60% of youth offenders! Children who cannot communicate as well as their same-age peers are more likely to demonstrate behavior problems, and when they encounter law enforcement officers, they are less equipped to understand and follow basic instructions, much less complex instructions like the Miranda rights. Rather than passing legislation like HB 89, which seeks to expand the school-to-prison pipeline (which disproportionately targets children with disabilities and minorities), we must aim to prevent these problems before they happen. Properly-funded education will reduce criminality, and legislation which supports school counselors, SLPs, small class sizes, school psychologists, and special education teachers will be more effective at preventing and reducing delinquency than this ill-conceived bill. Instead, I encourage you to pass bills like HB 547, which aim to support school SLPs. If you have any questions, please reach out to me at rrsenter@umd.edu. Thank you!
Vote No on HB89 - This bill will hugely harm students with disabilities, especially those with autism and other developmental disabilities. Children with disabilities have complex behaviors and needs, this bill would further stigmatize these children, punish them for their disabilities and force them out of the education setting and into the school to prison pipeline.
Dear Delegates, I work for the May Institute where we provide medically necessary services to persons with autism and related disabilities. In my profession, we provide therapy to increase more socially acceptable behavior, as well as decrease problem behavior. I have run across many scenarios where school districts lack the support that they need to provide persons with disabilities a free and accessible education. Many times they are suspended without any sort of plan on what to do next when they come back. It can become cyclical at times. I feel that this bill would create more barriers for children and adolescence to get the therapeutic support that they need. In addition, it would further stigmatize these individuals with disabilities as being "bad" kids. I am asking everyone to vote "no" on this bill. Virginia already does not have a great track record when it comes to this.
This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to criminalized.
Stop criminalizing behavior of children! Vote NO to HB89!! Children acting out often have home issues or health issues or other things as a root cause of behavior. They need assistance and age appropriate services to help them, not be treated like criminals. Vote NO to HB89!
I would like to comment that there should be a no vote from all of you for this bill My son can become overstimulated and have a meltdown at the store He should not be charged if he can’t control what happens to his brain during a meltdown He is not the only one
Vote no on HB89. Even with our recent legislative actions to support students rather than criminalize adolescent behavior, Virginia remains a national leader in referring students to law enforcement from school. It was only in 2020 that Virginia repealed disorderly conduct from school discipline options. We have been in the throes of a pandemic for the last 2 years and have not had an opportunity to reap the benefits of alternative supports to keep our children in school rather than in court. Vote no on HB89. It takes Virginia backwards instead of forwards at a time when our children need more support than ever. We must not move back to using the court system for school discipline.
Hello. Thank you for the work this committee is doing. It is so important. However, I am deeply concerned as a parent of a special needs child with HB89. I cannot imagine a worse bill to feed the school to prison pipeline and incriminate our special needs, unless you rounded them up and place them in a detention center. This bill is the equivalent of doing that to our children. Please vote no to this bill. Our children are often suspended and expelled as a result of their disability. In Loudoun our numbers are very high in disciplining special needs children but adding disorderly conduct to that is not the solution. Lowering classroom ratios, adding a social emotional program like Zones of Regulation, and more counselors with less case loads could help turn things around in elementary and middle school. It requires a significant investment but our children are worth it. Respectfully, Heidi Bunkua
Vote no on HB 89.
VOTE NO on HB89-- This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to be criminalized. Please vote NO!
This bill as introduced allows no relief nor distinction amongst those with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, such as Autism and other similar neurological disorders. Persons must not be criminalized due to disabilities, and instead supported with proper, adequate care, mental health and behavioral supports. Please do not criminalize our children with disabilities wherein some behaviors and actions are completely and legitimately out of their control. Support, not incarcerate.
Voting No on HB89
Please vote no on HB89. It would unfairly impact autistic and developmentally disabled children.
Please vote no on this bill. My son has Autism and I would hate to think if he has a meltdown one day that he could be charged with a crime. Thanks
Stop criminalizing the behavior of children! Vote NO on HB89.
Please do not vote for HB 89.
I have three kids with Pandas/Pans. PANS is considered to be inflammation of the basal ganglia and is thought to be caused by infections and other inflammatory reactions. PANS causes dramatic changes in my child and makes it so they are not in control of themselves. It requires urgent, aggressive medical treatment. These are the kids who have behavioral issues and disorderly conduct. Please consider these children and educate yourself on this disease before passing a bill like this.
I’ve been bashed so hard for my ‘behavior’ and because of that, I lost motivation, I got scarred for life and I nearly ended my own life. We cannot let this pass. We don’t need salt rubbed in our scars.
I am very opposed to HB29 as it is written. As the parent of a special needs child, I have seen what can happen when these individuals are treated as criminals. Justice is not necessarily dispensed, and they can...and are...both mentally scarred and legally branded. Unless there is modification of the bill as it is written, it must be defeated. Yes, there is a need for keeping law and order in our schools; but this bill is NOT the way to do that. Better, more thoughtful legislation must be considered.
Stop criminalizing behavior of children. Vote NO on HB89
My son has profound developmental and intellectual disabilities. Occasionally he becomes overwhelmed and can have disruptive behavior-it is wrong to criminalize his behavior . When considering HB89, please remember that children and people with profound developmental/intellectual disabilities are NOT our peers when it comes to ability to rationally think through their actions. Especially when experiencing anxiety or sensory overload, they need support not punishment. Criminalizing children’s behavior is an expensive, esteem crushing mistake by adults who are out of energy and creativity -there are many strategies currently gaining popularity in special needs community that recognize need for support not punishment and have had great success in schools and group homes in Virginia and parts of Europe and UK. Including the Ukeru approach (used at Grafton school in Winchesterand to be implemented next school year in Fairfax county) and the Low- arousal approach used throughout Scandinavia and UK. HB89 shifts responsible for mature/thoughtful behavior by capable adults to children whose brains are not fully developed-it’s short sighted and ineffective -please vote no!
As a mother of children with special needs, I beg of you NOT to pass such a horrible bill! If children of this age or any age for that manner are acting out they require mental health treatment NOT jail. In fact if my son had been able to be charged with disorderly conduct when he walked out of the classroom in a fit of rage over testing. The then abusive teacher and administrator who sat on him in the stairwell to prevent him from eloping, could have charged him with disorderly conduct and my son with Autism, ADHD, and Bi-Polar disorder would have been sent to Juvenile Detention instead of crisis mental health services. That would have cause irreparable harm to him from which he might not have recovered. DO NOT PASS HB-89! Not only for my children, but the hundreds of students I teach in this age group who need help and support not jail.
VOTE NO on HB89-- * This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. * Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) * Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to criminalized. * Students with disabilities should not be reported as engaging in criminal conduct for having a behavioral crisis. It would be a better idea to provide teacher/ administrator training and additional support in classrooms to help students with special needs. My son is on the autism spectrum and it is terrifying that anyone in our great state is attempting to criminalize the behavior of children that we should be helping.
VOTE NO on HB89: - This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. - Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) - Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to criminalized. - Schoo staff may have tools or process to handle disorder from students.
VOTE THIS BILL DOWN PLEASE ITS TRRRBLE FOR YMY ARC LCUB PALS AND EMEBERS!
I vote NO for this bill
Voices for Virginia's Children opposes HB89
Greetings Legislators, I strongly oppose HB89 with the amendment as it will criminalize our students and children. We should be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline— not funneling more students through. School is supposed to be a safe and supportive place. I myself suffered from Youth Incarceration and suffered detrimental effects from it. Please ensure that section D. IS NOT CROSSED OUT. "The provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary or secondary school student if the disorderly conduct occurred on the property of any elementary or secondary school, on a school bus as defined in § 46.2-100, or at any activity conducted or sponsored by any elementary or secondary school." If this bill passes the rate of Black, Latin American, and 2SLGBTQIA+ students will be disproportionately targeted as they already make up the majority of students in juvenile detention centers. 54.58% of the children and teens in Virginia juvenile detention centers are Black. 12.75% are Latin American. In Virginia it can cost $215K/year to imprison a child, but only $12K/year for public education. Keep our kids in school, not in prison! Oppose HB89. Thank you for taking the time to read this comment.
*Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) *Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children should not continue to criminalized. This bill would open the door for students with disabilities being reported to law enforcement in alarming numbers. Why are we criminalizing children? ->>VOTE NO on HB89 Thank you
Greetings Legislators, I strongly oppose HB89 with the amendment as it will criminalize our students and children. We should be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline— not funneling more students through. School is supposed to be a safe and supportive space. Ensure that section D. "The provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary or secondary school student if the disorderly conduct occurred on the property of any elementary or secondary school, on a school bus as defined in § 46.2-100, or at any activity conducted or sponsored by any elementary or secondary school." is not crossed out. If this bill passes: the rate of Black, Latin American, and 2SLGBTQIA+ students will be disproportionately targeted as they already make up the majority of students in juvenile detention centers. 54.58% of the children and teens in Virginia juvenile detention centers are Black. 12.75% are Latin American. Out of the 400 children and teens incarcerated, 20% are 2SLGBTQIA+. In addition to this being an issue of institutionalized racism and gender-based violence, this has a financial impact, too. In Virginia it can cost $215K/year to imprison a child, but only $12K/year for public education. Keep our kids in school, not in prison! Oppose HB89. Thank you for taking the time to read this comment. For more information regarding the statistics in the comment, visit: [https://www.nokidsinprison.org/](https://www.nokidsinprison.org/?fbclid=IwAR0co7Zt1y354C2krmn-Nur3aQGQmzX-gUAxvnbfYe3jVLOKp_UpecQrY1A)
Greetings Legislators, I strongly oppose HB89 with the amendment as it will criminalize our students and children. We should be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline— not funneling more students through. School is supposed to be a safe and supportive space. Ensure that section D. "The provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary or secondary school student if the disorderly conduct occurred on the property of any elementary or secondary school, on a school bus as defined in § 46.2-100, or at any activity conducted or sponsored by any elementary or secondary school." is not crossed out. If this bill passes: the rate of Black, Latin American, and 2SLGBTQIA+ students will be disproportionately targeted as they already make up the majority of students in juvenile detention centers. 54.58% of the children and teens in Virginia juvenile detention centers are Black. 12.75% are Latin American. Out of the 400 children and teens incarcerated, 20% are 2SLGBTQIA+. In addition to this being an issue of institutionalized racism and gender-based violence, this has a financial impact, too. In Virginia it can cost $215K/year to imprison a child, but only $12K/year for public education. Keep our kids in school, not in prison! Oppose HB89. Thank you for taking the time to read this comment. For more information regarding the statistics in the comment, visit: https://www.nokidsinprison.org/