Parent urges Franklin County board to keep developmental preschool, says proposed change may violate placement rules

Carissa Tierney, a lifetime Franklin County resident and parent of a preschooler, told the school board at its May 11 meeting that the district’s plan to dissolve the developmental preschool would remove an essential specialized setting for children with significant needs.

"By changing . . . the program . . . the district is engaging in predetermination," Tierney said, adding that under "Article 7" her son's placement "must be an individual decision." She told trustees that her son, who has benefited from a master-level special-education teacher, requires real-time, specially designed instruction that she said cannot be replicated in a pull-out/push-in model.

Tierney asked the board to reconsider moving the preschool’s licensed special-education teacher into a general-education role and cautioned that some preschool disabilities, including autism, require a preschool teacher licensed in special education. She said switching the model would effectively create a paper "ghost teacher of record" and could leave families without the developmental option that supported her son’s progress.

Board members did not take action during the meeting. The chair noted the board typically does not respond during public comment but said staff would follow up; Tierney said she expected to address the issue further at an upcoming case conference.

Why it matters: parents who testified said the developmental preschool provides specialized instruction that they believe cannot be reproduced in an inclusive model without the same licensed staff, and they warned that changing the program could push families away from the district. The district’s master facilities and staffing discussions are ongoing; the board later noted that details about facilities and staffing would be clarified in coming weeks.

What the transcript shows: Tierney repeatedly stated that moving the teacher to a general-education assignment and relying on a K–6 special-education teacher for pull-in/pull-out services would not meet the needs of preschoolers who require a licensed preschool special-education teacher. She referenced "Article 7" when discussing placement protections and said she planned to pursue the matter in an upcoming case conference.

Next steps: The board did not vote on preschool program changes at the meeting. Tierney requested further discussion; the board indicated staff would follow up and the issue may return to committee or a future agenda for formal consideration.