I am writing this letter in regards to my not being eligible for unemployment. These are the reasons I did not take the praxis test required to retain my position as a Para educator.

At the time NCLB was enacted, I was all for it. At last a time when student needs came first. Professional growth would really mean something. My peers would have an idea where my reasoning and methods came from.

I am a certified disabilities assistant. In 1991 I attended classes, sanctioned by the Illinois Department of Health, at the DD facility I was employed at. Upon the completion of the required classes, tests and supervised training I was certified as a disabilities assistant. This position helps to sustain and further the knowledge the clients acquired during their formal years of schooling. Many were of the generation of institutions, but younger ones were coming up quick. The knowledge I received from the job and the people entrusted to me were invaluable. These were the skills I brought with me to education.

In 1991 I also filled out an application for employment as a special education assistant and was quickly called to go to a high school BD class. I was given a desk and told that all I really had to do was grade papers and be available if the teacher had to leave the room, no further training was given. I was happy I at least had training in behavior management techniques.

This is how it was, year after year: get laid off, be reassigned, enter a different classroom,(rarely the same), and told “you’ll catch on”. This isn’t to say I didn’t work with some fine teachers or that doing a BD class one year, than an EN1/EN2, followed by one on one inclusion, ect. weren’t interesting and more knowledge for me, but I wasn’t trained for any of those assignments. Professional growth, if there was any was, “How to work together as a team!”, “pillars of strength” and the occasional “Boardmaker” training. Again I was glad I had the training and skills necessary to safely transfer a student from the wheelchair to the toilet or recognize when someone had been over medicated. Through the years, all of my training, especially the paper work, were invaluable.

Then in 1999 I became part of a transition program that is community based; the real world of having a disability for students, parents and the general public. The goal was to help the student use skills necessary to be as independent and safe as they possibly could. We would be a student generated program using a functional based curriculum. Again I was not trained.

This time though, I was working with a teacher that I had worked with while he was a student teacher and I was still working residential. At that time we talked about all the problems facing special ed. students exiting school without proper training for independence, so I knew where he was coming from and I knew where we could take the next generation of people with disabilities by bridging a gap from school to the real world.

We started out with one teacher, two assistants and a vocational coordinator. We made our own training program that now would allow me to be certified in CPR and first-aid, participate in decision making, program development and have professional growth monthly. These were a team decision.

It was the most cohesive work environment I had ever worked in. I was entrusted to take my clients into a world, that was often not ready to deal with so competent a group of young adults. We trained them for the life they and everybody has every day. We worked with student teachers regularly. We had monthly meetings that invited anyone that wanted to attend, giving useful information. A usual comment, at any of our open houses, was I wish my child knew how to do this and do it consistently. This was said by parents of college students.

Again, in 2002 NCLB seemed like a good idea, however it never really accomplished anything except mass producing imitation crab or as they are now called highly qualified Para educators. Still no training was involved in producing this staff, all they had to do was TAKE THE TEST! Some of them had to take basic skills classes to take THE TEST! Others had to TAKE THE TEST several times to pass THE TEST! However, most know nothing of how to develop, follow or fill out a task analysis. Self-determination is not something most encourage on a daily basis and behavior reports necessary as follow-up are not, if at all, done in a professional manner. Whenever I have produced any type of observation report, to any teacher or necessary staff member I have worked with, that information was always appreciated and then used to improve the learning of that particular student. Usually the next day. That is my training; observe, record and report.

I feel I was within my right of civil disobedience not to take the test. I understood that I would not have a job if the rules didn’t change. I tried to get interested parties to follow the Health Departments lead in mass producing qualified personnel by giving them training in areas necessary to their job or areas they had never experienced before, but I am only one person. In July the education department did make a revision to
just the test and have extended the time allowed to train the highly qualified staff they now appear to have.

The district I work for does not have mandatory professional growth as per DUEA contract. At the first meeting concerning NCLB I asked about being certified in a related field and was told I could have 30 college hours in basket weaving or take the test. DUEA went so far as to ask to be allowed to present their plan, without consideration to anything but their agenda and they were rejected because the state did not want any law suits.

In this day and age I can’t just go along with the fact that because I was unwilling to take a test I should be denied unemployment. It is an insult to me and those like me, that I gave 16 years of service, (check my file to determine my performance), left over 100 accumulated sick days, to be denied again, this time the right to be counted as unemployed. It is my opinion that would just be wrong. Just as taking a proficiency test to determine someone be eligible to be trained as a Para educator is wrong.

My main points of contention are:
I have specialized training as a disabilities assistant that was ignored and demeaned.
I have 16 years of service and over 300 hours of professional growth.
I only deal with functional academics. It is my opinion that anyone in a classroom should be able to learn the lessons given by the teacher without taking a test to prove that knowledge,(as we only deal with K-12).
I do not work in a Title I school.
Why a proficiency test in basic skills unrelated to direct job performance?

At the time requirements for police and fire workers was revised they didn’t give the senior members a test to see if they could be trained to do their job. Nor were they fired and then denied the right to be counted as unemployed. Again there were no exceptions or considerations made when deciding part I NCLB. Hopefully part II NCLB will address this issue. But I was told that I would have to reapply, loosing all my seniority.

In conclusion, my qualifications were not addressed as far as years of experience and certification of abilities, therefore it is my opinion the position I was hired for was eliminated.

Sincerely,
Double Dipper

I just had to let this go as my situation will not change until I do. Thanks for listening and now on to the next thing!