Matt:
 MS>     Would it be more realistic to say the nonreaders 
 MS> drop out "before age 18" than "before the senior year"?
Not necessarily.  Special ed kids can remain in the program up until the age 
of 22 in some cases.  They can "drop out", then return any number of times 
until the age they are no longer served.  In school at least they have a 
social life AND often a free meal.  Life outside can get lonely and tough.  
Sometimes that is all that is needed to make the difference for some kids.
 MS>     To what extent, if any, are the nonreaders put into 
 MS> regular HS classes in _any_ subject?  I question how 
 MS> much they will learn in biology or history if they 
 MS> cannot read.  
That is our entire issue.  Science, history, economics, health, etc. are 
virtually lost on non-readers, except in some instances.  If the kid is a 
non-reader because he will not do nor attempt his work, then chances are he 
is a disruption.  If the kid is a non-reader for some other handicap, but is 
willing to work and perform the activities and actively particpates in 
discussions, he at least obtains 2 valuable skills.  He learns to work as a 
team (and other members in the class learn to work with people with 
handicapping conditions) and he some exposure to the content of the course.
Our goals are, however, to develop as many functional readers as possible.  
If we can spend an extra 2 years working on reading, and as long as the 
student is actually working, then we will have done the student (and society) 
a tremendous favor.  There is nothing that dictates what the content of our 
reading material must be, except that it must be at a level the student can 
comprehend and grow upon.  In the process, the student can recieve all the 
curricular material, albeit at a modified depth.
 MS>     I'd call that a "toughlove"-style program you're 
 MS> planning.  You are to be commended for facing the 
 MS> reality that such students just cannot successfully 
 MS> handle HS coursework.  (I'd suggest that this country's 
 MS> schools set up vocational programs for them when they 
 MS> reach HS age, programs with no academic content after 
 MS> the program you are planning.)
We recognize that only a minority of people attend college.  Why prepare for 
a 100% collegiate attendance if only 35% (I believe that is the figure 
floating around) attend school beyond high school.  That sets us up to fail.  
Several of us believe high schools would best serve if they prepared students 
for a trade rather than a profession, and leave the profession development up 
to the universities.  A student entering college with a trade is well 
prepared for the rigors he will encounter therein, especially if he has spent 
a year or two applying those skill.  Take a civil engineering student.  
Wouldn't he be as well or better off if he had a working knowledge of 
building construction, versus strictly a theoretic knowledge?  There are 
several advantages to taking a trade prior to entering college.  I contend 
that nothing will teach the value of a 16th inch like woodshop.
Yet we also recognize we live in a highly technical society today, and if you 
can't read, you are going to suffer no matter what field you endeavor.
Mike Martin
--- Maximus 3.00
---------------