By Sue Ellen Spaulding

Anderson resident

 The Anderson Herald Bulletin recently published an article titled, “ACS establishes new school boundaries.” The author quoted at least two Anderson Community Schools officials who seemed to be happily promising the public that school boundaries (East Side/Highland and North Side/Anderson) would remain the same, under new districting.  Superintendant Lowe stated: “The easiest way for you to know is the East Side Middle School boundary and Highland High School boundaries are the very same now. The same applies for North Side Middle School and Anderson High School.’ ’’This promise is affirmed later in the article by school board member Keith Millikan:  “Under the new boundary guidelines, all East Side students will go to Highland High and all North Side students will go to Anderson High. This will mean that students will stay together throughout middle school and high school, something ACS board member Keith Millikan supports. “You just don’t have your kids split up, particularly in the athletics and band and extracurriculars” .... Millikan said he prefers the new boundary plan to the old one since he had a personal experience with the previous plan. “Kids that have been friends for three years then go to a different high school. I know that happened to one of mine. ...’ ’’

In an exception to these statements, students who have profound special needs will attend East Side Middle School, but will then attend Anderson High School. They will be the only ones who will have to experience the “split” that Millikan describes, from his very own experience, as difficult. In the redistricting plan, as well as in these statements from our top school officials, students with profound and severe special needs are treated as invisible.

The redistricting plan, as well as the statements issued in the article, exclude those children with severe special needs as though they do not even exist. Such an attitude represents one of the worst fears for those families who have children with profound needs. As most would likely attest, the act of treating children who are different as though they are invisible, as though they do not matter, is one the most hurtful responses possible. These special children, created by God, and therefore, valued in his eyes, are just as much as part of the Anderson Community Schools as all other children. They should not be disregarded when plans are made, nor when statements are issued, especially by those who have been elected to make decisions based on sound educational objectives.

The idea that these students will not be affected by the very separation realized and described by Mr. Millikan shows a complete lack of understanding of what is educationally beneficial for these students. Perhaps even more than most students, those who have special needs are in need of consistency, of a seamless transition.  Troublesome interruptions and awkward adjustments may be even more painful and educationally damaging to them than it would be for other students. Peer tutoring and peer interactions are important to their learning atmosphere, and also benefit the students from other classes who are involved in such interactions.

A precedent has already been set, with these students beginning at Erskine, continuing at South Side and Anderson High. The peer tutors who worked with them at South Side will now be at North Side, while the students with profound needs will be isolated from this core of tutors by being placed at East Side. Peer tutors have been positively impacted by these students with severe needs, perhaps as much as the students with severe needs have been impacted by their peer tutors. The interruption to this successful system has not been explained; in fact, ACS administrators have obviously regarded it as unimportant.

Recently, I have been encouraged by the efforts toward more positive public relations emanating from the school board and other school officials. I thank, among others,  The Herald Bulletin, the Rev. Jim Lyons and the school officials themselves for working toward an atmosphere of openness and healthy communication; however, there is still much work to be done.

The recent attitudes tell me that ACS officials still have a long path ahead to reach a satisfactory image of healthy public relations. I can only hope that this journey toward open communication and sensitivity will continue forward.

Sue Ellen Spaulding is a grandmother and a retired teacher.