There has been a lot of media attention drawn to the case of Alex Barton. It’s a media circus and I wonder what is going to happen with Alex when all of the hype dies down. He still needs an education. Mrs. Barton is going to have some pretty tough choices to make with or without the cameras rolling and the bloggers commenting. I wonder where will the support for Alex be then?

But besides that, I read an interesting take on a similar situation from the blog, Thoughts on Education Policy. The blogger, Corey, writes, “I think we should try to create systems that intervene in these types of situations before either the teacher or the student reaches the boiling point.” I have to say I’m inclined to agree. But a system designed to support “THE TEACHER” already exists in most states. What I’d like to know is if this child posed such a degree of difficulty for this teacher for such a lengthy period of time, presumably the entire school year, why wasn’t a system such as this utilized? Now, I’m not sure of the way things work in Florida but I’ll give you an example of how a situation like Alex’s could have been handled in New Jersey.

Lets say Alex was in a New Jersey public school and the teacher started to have difficulty managing Alex in the classroom. Even if the child is eligible for special education services or had been referred to special education there is also another team that could have been called upon to provide the TEACHER with support. It is a committee, usually called the Intervention and Referral Service Committee that every public school district in New Jersey is supposed to have. Some schools call it different things like Pupil Assistance Team or Pupil Assistance Committee but it’s the same thing. One thing it is not the same as it is not the same as a Child Study Team, that’s strictly special education. I can’t tell you how many teachers that I’ve encountered don’t know that. Which automatically tells me that the committee isn’t working in that district.

Anyway, the Intervention and Referral Service Committee is supposed to be in place to support, “THE TEACHER.” Note I said the TEACHER not the student. Either the parent, the teacher, or another staff member could refer the student’s case to the Intervention and Referral Service Committee. Once referred staff members, including the teacher and usually the parent meet to discuss strategies that the teacher or parent can use to help the child succeed in school. The committee is often made up of the principal, some experienced teachers, maybe a member of the child study team, or any other school member that might have some good ideas. The goal is to give the teacher alternate strategies to extend the teacher’s ability to work with students they are having difficulty reaching. By the end of the meeting the teacher should have what is called an “Action Plan” to bring back to her room to help her with the child.

Sometimes some really creative ideas come out of these meetings to HELP the TEACHER help the child meet with increasing success in the classroom environment. I’ve been lucky to work with some really creative educators who prove that they are willing to go the extra step to lend a hand especially if another teacher is in need. That kind of support is important for a teacher who like Wendy Portillow might feel that they are at their wits end. The most important thing the Intervention and Referral Service Committee does is to provide the teacher with an ongoing system of support, monitoring, and feedback of strategies and techniques to help the teacher work with the child. It basically sends out a lifeline to the teacher and helps prevent the teacher from going down with the ship, like Wendy Portillow.

The Intervention and Referral Services Committee sounds wonderful doesn’t it. It is, in a perfect world. However like any education model some school districts can effectively carry it out and others well they barely have it together and rarely is the committee utilized or utilized appropriately. I know this from firsthand experience. Remember I told you how often teachers confuse it with the Child Study Team. The reason is simple, it depends on its effectiveness. Whether or not the committee is effective depends entirely on three things. One, the implementation, training, development and oversight of it by administration. Two, the receptiveness of the teacher to carry out the strategies suggested. Three, the ongoing monitoring and feedback of the Action Plan that the committee creates.

So lets go back to Alex Barton even if the school district had not classified him yet or had classified him where was the support for the teacher? Did she go through a committee process, was there ongoing monitoring of Alex’s needs to support the teacher, did she just ignore the strategies suggested? Even if the teacher had no training on how to work with Asperger’s students, didn’t the administration step in to support the teacher, especially if they knew this child posed a degree of difficulty for her? How is it that the child was in the nurse’s office and no one at the school district, including the nurse, realized that was a problem? Is the nurse frequently utilized as a time out place? I think when all is said and done in the case of Alex Barton and Port St. Lucie schools there might be more to look at than just the poor choices made by one teacher.

For more information about NJ Intervention and Referral Service Committees you can view the manual online at:

http://www.state.nj.us/education/students/irs/