Listen carefully, friends. Right around 1:53.
She’s not saying “chronically tardy.” Nor is she saying “medically annoying” as in “extremely annoying.” Just no. What she is doing in this planned speech is trying to be humorous, and using children with special needs as a punch line.
The reason tardiness or extreme annoyance would make no sense here is that in context, she’s talking about how teachers diversify their curriculum to meet the needs of students who fall into certain categories. These categories qualify students for exceptional education and she begins to list them- the blind, the hearing impaired, the physically challenged, the gifted and talented. The next two would be the intellectually disabled and the medically fragile. Why didn’t she just use those terms?
Apparently it’s more amusing to replace “intellectually disabled” with “chronically (re)tarded” and “medically fragile” with “medically annoying.” And, hey, when you are in a room with presumably like minded individuals, and you’re a leader among them, you get cocky and say what you think will get a big laugh.
At the expense of children.
So let her know what you think.
Twitter: @lily_garcia or @NEAToday