Is the IEP a Contract?
IDEA 2004 Summary-Timelines
Take The IEP 40 Question Quiz
Under IDEA 2004, What Is My Role as a General or Special Education Teacher in Developing the IEP?
Questions......Oh Yes, and Answers
Achieving Educational Success
Special Education Advocacy: Nine Rules of Thumb
Parents' Guide to College Planning for Gifted Kids
How to Be Your Child's Champion
Special Education Advocacy: People Make
What to Include in an IEP
Managing Documents Under IDEA
The IEP Cycle
Preparing for an IEP
Know your rights
Due Process Hearings
Building Bridges Between Home and School
Pointers for Parents in Managing Behaviors of
Children With Learning Difficulties
Suspensions, Expulsions, and IEP's
Tests and Measurements for the Parent, Teacher, Advocate &Attorney
How to Disagree with the IEP Team Without Starting World War III
KIDS! Understanding Your IEP!!
Tips: How to Use IDEA 2004 to Improve Your Child's Special Education

IEP WEB LINKS

Technical assistance Alliance for Parents

U.S. Department of Education

KidsHealth

Parent Advocacy Coalition for Educational Rights

Designing Individualized Education Program (IEP)-Transition Plans

Special Educator's Page

Ontario Ministry of Education

Disability Resources

Queensland Department of Education

Adapted Physical Education Central

Molde University in Norway (College IEP)

Reading Success Lab

My Child-IEP Cerebral Palsy

                                                                            Return to Top

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Is the IEP a Contract?

IDEA 1997 states that the IEP does not establish a contractual relationship.

What about the Doe v Withers case?

Withers was not on a contract theory but instead relied on a West Virginia state human rights disability statute. Here is information about this landmark case which is not posted on the internet.

Doe v. Withers is a 1992 case that was decided in part under United States Code Section 1983.

Practically speaking, Doe v. Withers is little more than a simple jury trial in a civil case that is unreported in the State or Federal Court Reporters. But Doe v. Withers is also a landmark case.

Because it was jury verdict in a civil trial and was not appealed, Doe v. Withers is not reported in the usual publications that publish caselaw decisions - usually cases on appeal.

Why is this case so significant?

Doe v. Withers was the first special education jury trial and the first special education dollar damages case (1983-1993).

It is also very significant because the history teacher, (a prominent member of the General Assembly at that time, and, it is believed, a member of the education funding committee) would not follow the IEP, despite being instructed to by the Superintendent, School Principal, Special Education Director, and special education teacher. The special education teacher and Director of Special Education were not defendants in the civil suit because there was documentation in the file that they directed to the teacher to follow the IEP. The Superintendent and School Principal were dismissed from the case because they too, had told Withers to follow the IEP.

This case paved the way for subsequent special education damage cases, including W.B. v. Matula, the landmark case from the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and Witte v. Clark County, a recent case from the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

I. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983

31. The Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 29 as though fully set forth herein.

32. The Defendants, acting under color of state law as public school teachers, principals, administrators and the Board of Education, deprived the Plaintiff, D. D., of his statutorily protected civil right to a FAPE as guaranteed by federal and state laws for the education of handicapped children and as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 3, Section 10 of the Constitution of the State of West Virginia.

33. As a result of these constitutional deprivations, the Plaintiffs were damaged as alleged herein.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs pray for damages as follows:

COMPENSATORY

$30,000.00 against Defendant Michael Withers;

$10,000.00 against Defendant Greg Cartwright;

$10,000.00 against Defendant Wendell Teets; and

$10,000.00 against Defendant Taylor County Board of Education.

PUNITIVE

$30,000.00 against Defendant Michael Withers.

Furthermore, the Plaintiffs pray for injunctive relief requiring all Defendants to immediately comply with the requirements of Public Law 94-142 as well as federal and state laws and regulations protecting the rights of handicapped children to a Free Appropriate Public Education. The Plaintiffs also pray for attorney’s fees and costs and such other relief as this Court may deem appropriate.



JOHN DOE,

JANE DOE and By Counsel.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Take the 40 Question IEP Quiz, but first read the introduction......

Introduction                                        Return to Top

The IEP requirements under Part B of the IDEA emphasize the importance of three core concepts: (1) the involvement and progress of each child with a disability in the general curriculum including addressing the unique needs that arise out of the child’s disability; (2) the involvement of parents and students, together with regular and special education personnel, in making individual decisions to support each student’s (child’s) educational success, and (3) the
preparation of students with disabilities for employment and other post-school activities.

The first three sections provide guidance regarding the IEP requirements as they relate to the three core concepts described above. Section IV addresses other questions regarding the development and content of IEPs, including questions about the timelines and responsibility for developing and implementing IEPs, participation in IEP meetings, and IEP content. Section IV also addresses questions on other selected requirements under IDEA.

I. Involvement and Progress of Each Child With a Disability in the General Curriculum

In enacting the IDEA Amendments of 1997, the Congress found that research, demonstration, and practice over the past 20 years in special education and related disciplines have demonstrated that an effective educational system now and in the future must maintain high academic standards and clear performance goals for children with disabilities, consistent with the standards and expectations for all students in the educational system, and provide for appropriate and effective strategies and methods to ensure that students who are children with disabilities have maximum opportunities to achieve those standards and goals. [Section 651(a)(6)(A) of the Act.]

Accordingly, the evaluation and IEP provisions of Part B place great emphasis on the involvement and progress of children with disabilities in the general curriculum. (The term ``general curriculum,’’ as used in these regulations, including this Appendix, refers to the curriculum that is used with non-disabled children.)

While the Act and regulations recognize that IEP teams must make individualized decisions about the special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided to each child with a disability, they are driven by IDEA’s strong preference that, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities be educated in regular classes with their non-disabled peers with appropriate supplementary aids and services.

In many cases, children with disabilities will need appropriate supports in order to successfully progress in the general curriculum, participate in State and district-wide assessment programs, achieve the measurable goals in their IEPs, and be educated together with their non-disabled peers. Accordingly, the Act requires the IEP team to determine, and the public agency to [FR Page 12471] provide, the accommodations, modifications, supports, and supplementary aids and services, needed by each child with a disability to successfully be involved in and progress in the general curriculum achieve the goals of the IEP, and successfully demonstrate his or her competencies in State and district-wide assessments.

1. What are the major Part B IEP requirements that govern the involvement and progress of children with disabilities in the general curriculum?

Present Levels of Educational Performance

Section 300.347(a)(1) requires that the IEP for each child with a disability include ``* * * a statement of the child’s present levels of educational performance, including--(i) how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum; or (ii) for preschool children, as appropriate, how the child’s disability affects the child’s participation in appropriate activities * * *’’ (``Appropriate activities’’ in this context refers to age-relevant developmental abilities or milestones that typically developing children of the same age would be performing or would have achieved.)

The IEP team’s determination of how each child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum is a primary consideration in the development of the child’s IEP. In assessing children with disabilities, school districts may use a variety of assessment techniques to determine the extent to which these children can be involved and progress in the general curriculum, such as criterion-referenced tests, standard achievement tests, diagnostic tests, other tests, or any combination of the above.

The purpose of using these assessments is to determine the child’s present levels of educational performance and areas of need arising from the child’s disability so that approaches for ensuring the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum and any needed adaptations or modifications to that curriculum can be identified.

Measurable Annual Goals, including Benchmarks or Short-term objectives

Measurable annual goals, including benchmarks or short-term objectives, are critical to the strategic planning process used to develop and implement the IEP for each child with a disability. Once the IEP team has developed measurable annual goals for a child, the team (1) can develop strategies that will be most effective in realizing those goals and (2) must develop either measurable, intermediate steps (short-term objectives) or major milestones (benchmarks) that will enable parents, students, and educators to monitor progress during the year, and, if appropriate, to revise the IEP consistent with the student’s instructional needs.

The strong emphasis in Part B on linking the educational program of children with disabilities to the general curriculum is reflected in Sec. 300.347(a)(2), which requires that the IEP include:

a statement of measurable annual goals, including benchmarks or short-term objectives, related to--(i) meeting the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum; and (ii) meeting each of the child’s other educational needs that result from the child’s disability.As noted above, each annual goal must include either short-term objectives or benchmarks. The purpose of both is to enable a child’s teacher(s), parents, and others involved in developing and implementing the child’s IEP, to gauge, at intermediate times during the year, how well the child is progressing toward achievement of the annual goal. IEP teams may continue to develop short-term instructional objectives, that generally break the skills described in the annual goal down into discrete components. The revised statute and regulations also provide that, as an alternative, IEP teams may
develop benchmarks, which can be thought of as describing the amount of progress the child is expected to make within specified segments of the year. Generally, benchmarks establish expected performance levels that allow for regular checks of progress that coincide with the reporting periods for informing parents of their child’s progress toward achieving the annual goals. An IEP team may use either short term objectives or benchmarks or a combination of
the two depending on the nature of the annual goals and the needs of the child. Special Education and Related Services and Supplementary Aids and
Services

The requirements regarding services provided to address a child’s present levels of educational performance and to make progress toward the identified goals reinforce the emphasis on progress in the general curriculum, as well as maximizing the extent to which children with disabilities are educated with non-disabled children. Section 300.347(a)(3) requires that the IEP include:

a statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided for the child-- (i) to advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals; (ii) to be involved and progress in the general curriculum * * * and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and
(iii) to be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and non-disabled children in [extracurricular and other nonacademic activities] * * * [Italics added.] Extent to Which Child Will Participate With Non-disabled Children Section 300.347(a)(4) requires that each child’s IEP include ``An explanation of the extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with nondisabled children in the regular class and in [extracurricular and other nonacademic] activities * * *’’ This is consistent with the least restrictive environment (LRE) provisions at Secs. 300.550-300.553, which include requirements that:

(1) each child with a disability be educated with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate (Sec. 300.550(b)(1));
(2) each child with a disability be removed from the regular educational environment only when the nature or severity of the child’s disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily (Sec. 300.550(b)(1)); and

(3) to the maximum extent appropriate to the child’s needs, each child with a disability participates with non-disabled children in nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities (Sec. 300.553).

All services and educational placements under Part B must be individually determined in light of each child’s unique abilities and needs, to reasonably promote the child’s educational success. Placing children with disabilities in this manner should enable each disabled child to meet high expectations in the future. Although Part B requires that a child with a disability not be removed from the regular educational environment if the child’s education can
be achieved satisfactorily in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, Part B’s LRE principle is intended to ensure that a child with a disability is served in a setting where the child can be educated successfully. Even though IDEA does not mandate regular class placement for every disabled student, IDEA presumes that the first placement option considered for each disabled student by the student’s placement team, which must include the parent, is the school the child would attend if not disabled, with appropriate supplementary aids and services to facilitate such placement. Thus, before a disabled child can be placed outside of the regular educational environment, the full range of supplementary aids and services that if provided would facilitate the student’s placement in the regular classroom setting must be considered. Following that consideration, if a determination is made that particular disabled student cannot be educated satisfactorily in the regular educational environment, even with the provision of appropriate supplementary aids and services, that student then could be placed in a setting other than the regular classroom. Later, if it becomes apparent that the child’s IEP can be carried out in a less restrictive setting, with the provision of appropriate supplementary aids and services, if needed, Part B would require that the child’s placement be changed from the more restrictive setting to a less restrictive setting. In all cases, placement decisions must be individually determined on the basis of each child’s abilities and needs, and not solely on factors such as category of disability, significance of disability, availability of special education and related
services, configuration of the service delivery system, availability of space, or administrative convenience. Rather, each student’s IEP forms the basis for the placement decision.

Further, a student need not fail in the regular classroom before another placement can be considered. Conversely, IDEA does not require that a student demonstrate achievement of a specific performance level as a prerequisite for placement into a regular classroom. [FR Page 12472]

Participation in State or District-Wide Assessments of Student Achievement

Consistent with Sec. 300.138(a), which sets forth a presumption that children with disabilities will be included in general State and district-wide assessment programs, and provided with appropriate accommodations if necessary, Sec. 300.347(a)(5) requires that the IEP for each student with a disability include: ``(i) a statement of any individual modifications in the administration of State or district-wide assessments of student achievement that are needed in order for the child to participate in the assessment; and (ii) if the IEP team determines that the child will not participate in a particular State or district-wide assessment of student achievement (or part of an assessment of student achievement), a statement of-- (A) Why that assessment is not appropriate for the child; and (B) How the child will be assessed.’’

Regular Education Teacher Participation in the Development, Review, and Revision of IEPs

Very often, regular education teachers play a central role in the education of children with disabilities (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 103 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 23 (1997)) and have important expertise regarding the general curriculum and the general education environment. Further, with the emphasis on involvement and progress in the general curriculum added by the IDEA Amendments of 1997, regular education teachers have an increasingly critical role (together with special education and related services personnel) in implementing the program of FAPE for most children with disabilities, as described in their IEPs.

Accordingly, the IDEA Amendments of 1997 added a requirement that each child’s IEP team must include at least one regular education teacher of the child, if the child is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment (see Sec. 300.344(a)(2)). (See also Secs. 300.346(d) on the role of a regular education teacher in the development, review and revision of IEPs.)

2. Must a child’s IEP address his or her involvement in the general curriculum, regardless of the nature and severity of the child’s disability and the setting in which the child is educated?

Yes. The IEP for each child with a disability (including children who are educated in separate classrooms or schools) must address how the child will be involved and progress in the general curriculum. However, the Part B regulations recognize that some children have other educational needs resulting from their disability that also must be met, even though those needs are not directly linked to participation in the general curriculum.

Accordingly, Sec. 300.347(a)(1)(2) requires that each child’s IEP include:

A statement of measurable annual goals, including benchmarks or short-term objectives related to--(i) Meeting the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum; and (ii) meeting each of the child’s other educational needs that result from the child’s disability. [Italics added.]

Thus, the IEP team for each child with a disability must make an individualized determination regarding (1) how the child will be involved and progress in the general curriculum and what needs that result from the child’s disability must be met to facilitate that participation; (2) whether the child has any other educational needs resulting from his or her disability that also must be met; and (3) what special education and other services and supports must be described in the child’s IEP to address both sets of needs (consistent with Sec. 300.347(a)). For example, if the IEP team determines that in order for a child who is deaf to participate in the general curriculum he or she needs sign language and materials which reflect his or her language development, those needs (relating to the child’s participation in the general curriculum) must be addressed in the child’s IEP. In addition, if the team determines that the child also needs to expand his or her vocabulary in sign language that service must also be addressed in the applicable components of the child’s IEP. The IEP team may also wish to consider whether there is a need for members of the child’s family to receive training in sign language in order for the child to receive FAPE.

3. What must public agencies do to meet the requirements at Secs. 300.344(a)(2) and 300.346(d) regarding the participation of a ``regular education teacher’’ in the development, review, and revision of IEPs, for children aged 3 through 5 who are receiving preschool special education services?

If a public agency provides ``regular education’’ preschool services to non-disabled children, then the requirements of Secs. 300.344(a)(2) and 300.346(d) apply as they do in the case of older children with disabilities. If a public agency makes kindergarten available to nondisabled children, then a regular education kindergarten teacher could appropriately be the regular education teacher who would be a member of the IEP team, and, as appropriate, participate in IEP meetings, for a kindergarten-aged child who is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment.

If a public agency does not provide regular preschool education services to nondisabled children, the agency could designate an individual who, under State standards, is qualified to serve nondisabled children of the same age.

4. Must the measurable annual goals in a child’s IEP address all areas of the general curriculum, or only those areas in which the child’s involvement and progress are affected by the child’s disability?

Section 300.347(a)(2) requires that each child’s IEP include ``A statement of measurable annual goals, including benchmarks or short- term objectives, related to--(i) meeting the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum * * *; and (ii) meeting each of the child’s other educational needs that result from the child’s disability. . . .’’ (Italics added).

Thus, a public agency is not required to include in an IEP annual goals that relate to areas of the general curriculum in which the child’s disability does not affect the child’s ability to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum. If a child with a disability needs only modifications or accommodations in order to progress in an area of the general curriculum, the IEP does not need to include a goal for that area; however, the IEP would need to specify those
modifications or accommodations.

Public agencies often require all children, including children with disabilities, to demonstrate mastery in a given area of the general curriculum before allowing them to progress to the next level or grade in that area. Thus, in order to ensure that each child with a disability can effectively demonstrate competencies in an applicable area of the general curriculum, it is important for the IEP team to consider the accommodations and modifications that the child needs to assist him or her in demonstrating progress in that area.

II. Involvement of Parents and Students

The Congressional Committee Reports on the IDEA Amendments of 1997 express the view that the Amendments provide an opportunity for strengthening the role of parents, and emphasize that one of the purposes of the Amendments is to expand opportunities for parents and key public agency staff (e.g., special education, related services, regular education, and early intervention service providers, and other personnel) to work in new partnerships at both the State and local levels (H. Rep. 105-95, p. 82 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 4 and 5 (1997)). Accordingly, the IDEA Amendments of 1997 require that parents have an opportunity to participate in meetings with respect to the identification, evaluation, and educational placement of the child, and the provision of FAPE to the child. (Sec. 300.501(a)(2)). Thus, parents must now be part of: (1) the group that determines what additional data are needed as part of an evaluation of their child (Sec. 300.533(a)(1)); (2) the team that determines their child’s eligibility (Sec. 300.534(a)(1)); and (3) the group that makes decisions
on the educational placement of their child (Sec. 300.501(c)).

In addition, the concerns of parents and the information that they provide regarding their children must be considered in developing and reviewing their children’s IEPs (Secs. 300.343(c)(iii) and 300.346(a)(1)(i) and (b)); and the requirements for keeping parents informed about the educational progress of their children, particularly as it relates to their progress in the general curriculum, have been strengthened (Sec. 300.347(a)(7)).

The IDEA Amendments of 1997 also contain provisions that greatly strengthen the involvement of students with disabilities in decisions regarding their own futures, to facilitate movement from school to post-school activities. For example, those amendments (1) retained, essentially verbatim, the ``transition services’’ requirements from the IDEA Amendments of 1990 (which provide that a statement of needed transition services must be in the IEP of each student with a disability, beginning no later than age 16); and (2) significantly [FR Page 12473] expanded those provisions by adding a new annual requirement for the IEP to include ``transition planning’’ activities for students beginning at age 14. (See section IV of this appendix for a description of the transition services requirements and definition.)

With respect to student involvement in decisions regarding transition services, Sec. 300.344(b) provides that (1) ``the public agency shall invite a student with a disability of any age to attend his or her IEP meeting if a purpose of the meeting will be the consideration of--(i) The student’s transition services needs under Sec. 300.347(b)(1); or (ii) The needed transition services for the student under Sec. 300.347(b)(2); or (iii) Both;’’ and (2) ``If the student does not attend the IEP meeting, the public agency shall take other steps to ensure that the student’s preferences and interests are considered.’’ (Sec. 300.344(b)(2)).

The IDEA Amendments of 1997 also give States the authority to elect to transfer the rights accorded to parents under Part B to each student with a disability upon reaching the age of majority under State law (if the student has not been determined incompetent under State law) (Sec. 300.517). (Part B requires that if the rights transfer to the student, the public agency must provide any notice required under Part B to both the student and the parents.) If the State elects to provide for the transfer of rights from the parents to the student at the age of majority, the IEP must, beginning at least one year before a student reaches the age of majority under State law, include a statement that the student has been informed of any rights that will transfer to him or her upon reaching the age of majority. (Sec. 300.347(c)).

The IDEA Amendments of 1997 also permit, but do not require, States to establish a procedure for appointing the parent, or another appropriate individual if the parent is not available, to represent the educational interests of a student with a disability who has reached the age of majority under State law and has not been determined to be incompetent, but who is determined not to have the ability to provide informed consent with respect to his or her educational
program.

5. What is the role of the parents, including surrogate parents, in decisions regarding the educational program of their children?

The parents of a child with a disability are expected to be equal participants along with school personnel, in developing, reviewing, and revising the IEP for their child. This is an active role in which the parents (1) provide critical information regarding the strengths of their child and express their concerns for enhancing the education of their child; (2) participate in discussions about the child’s need for special education and related services and supplementary aids and services; and (3) join with the other participants in deciding how the child will be involved and progress in the general curriculum and participate in State and district-wide assessments, and what services the agency will provide to the child and in what setting.

As previously noted in the introduction to section II of this Appendix, Part B specifically provides that parents of children with disabilities--

Have an opportunity to participate in meetings with respect to the identification, evaluation, and educational placement of their child, and the provision of FAPE to the child (including IEP meetings) (Secs. 300.501(b), 300.344(a)(1), and 300.517;

Be part of the groups that determine what additional data are needed as part of an evaluation of their child (Sec. 300.533(a)(1)), and determine their child’s eligibility (Sec. 300.534(a)(1)) and educational placement (Sec. 300.501(c));

Have their concerns and the information that they provide regarding their child considered in developing and reviewing their child’s IEPs (Secs. 300.343(c)(iii) and 300.346(a)(1)(i) and (b)); and

Be regularly informed (by such means as periodic report cards), as specified in their child’s IEP, at least as often as parents are informed of their nondisabled children’s progress, of their child’s progress toward the annual goals in the IEP and the extent to which that progress is sufficient to enable the child to achieve the goals by the end of the year (Sec. 300.347(a)(7)).

A surrogate parent is a person appointed to represent the interests of a child with a disability in the educational decision- making process when no parent (as defined at Sec. 300.20) is known, the agency, after reasonable efforts, cannot locate the child’s parents, or the child is a ward of the State under the laws of the State. A surrogate parent has all of the rights and responsibilities of a parent under Part B (Sec. 300.515.)

6. What are the Part B requirements regarding the participation of a student (child) with a disability in an IEP meeting?

If a purpose of an IEP meeting for a student with a disability will be the consideration of the student’s transition services needs or needed transition services under Sec. 300.347(b)(1) or (2), or both, the public agency must invite the student and, as part of the notification to the parents of the IEP meeting, inform the parents that the agency will invite the student to the IEP meeting.

If the student does not attend, the public agency must take other steps to ensure that the student’s preferences and interests are considered. (See Sec. 300.344(b)).

Section Sec. 300.517 permits, but does not require, States to transfer procedural rights under Part B from the parents to students with disabilities who reach the age of majority under State law, if they have not been determined to be incompetent under State law. If those rights are to be transferred from the parents to the student, the public agency would be required to ensure that the student has the right to participate in IEP meetings set forth for parents in Sec. 300.345. However, at the discretion of the student or the public agency, the parents also could attend IEP meetings as ``* * * individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child * * *’’ (see Sec. 300.344(a)(6)).

In other circumstances, a child with a disability may attend ``if appropriate.’’ (Sec. 300.344(a)(7)). Generally, a child with a disability should attend the IEP meeting if the parent decides that it is appropriate for the child to do so. If possible, the agency and parents should discuss the appropriateness of the child’s participation before a decision is made, in order to help the parents determine whether or not the child’s attendance would be (1) helpful in developing the IEP or (2) directly beneficial to the child or both. The agency should inform the parents before each IEP meeting--as part of notification under Sec. 300.345(a)(1)--that they may invite their child to participate.

7. Must the public agency inform the parents of who will be at the IEP meeting?

Yes. In notifying parents about the meeting, the agency ``must indicate the purpose, time, and location of the meeting, and who will be in attendance.’’ (Sec. 300.345(b), italics added.) In addition, if a purpose of the IEP meeting will be the consideration of a student’s transition services needs or needed transition services under Sec. 300.347(b)(1) or (2) or both, the notice must also inform the parents that the agency is inviting the student, and identify any other agency that will be invited to send a representative.

The public agency also must inform the parents of the right of the parents and the agency to invite other individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child, including related services personnel as appropriate to be members of the IEP team. (Sec. 300.345(b)(1)(ii).)

It also may be appropriate for the agency to ask the parents to inform the agency of any individuals the parents will be bringing to the meeting. Parents are encouraged to let the agency know whom they intend to bring. Such cooperation can facilitate arrangements for the meeting, and help ensure a productive, child-centered meeting.

8. Do parents have the right to a copy of their child’s IEP?

Yes. Section 300.345(f) states that the public agency shall give the parent a copy of the IEP at no cost to the parent.

9. What is a public agency’s responsibility if it is not possible to reach consensus on what services should be included in a child’s IEP?

The IEP meeting serves as a communication vehicle between parents and school personnel, and enables them, as equal participants, to make joint, informed decisions regarding the (1) child’s needs and appropriate goals; (2) extent to which the child will be involved in the general curriculum and participate in the regular education environment and State and district-wide assessments; and (3) services needed to support that involvement and participation and to achieve agreed-upon goals. Parents are considered equal partners with school personnel in making these decisions, and the IEP team must consider the parents’ concerns and the information that they provide regarding their child in developing, reviewing, and revising IEPs (Secs. 300.343(c)(iii) and 300.346(a)(1) and (b)).
 

The IEP team should work toward consensus, but the public agency has ultimate responsibility to ensure that the IEP includes the services that the child needs in order to receive FAPE. It is not appropriate to make IEP decisions based upon a majority ``vote.’’ If the team cannot reach consensus, the public agency must provide the parents [FR Page 12474] with prior written notice of the agency’s proposals or refusals, or both, regarding the child’s educational
program, and the parents have the right to seek resolution of any disagreements by initiating an impartial due process hearing.

Every effort should be made to resolve differences between parents and school staff through voluntary mediation or some other informal
step, without resort to a due process hearing. However, mediation or other informal procedures may not be used to deny or delay a parent’s right to a due process hearing, or to deny any other rights afforded under Part B.

10. Does Part B require that public agencies inform parents regarding the educational progress of their children with disabilities?

Yes. The Part B statute and regulations include a number of provisions to help ensure that parents are involved in decisions regarding, and are informed about, their child’s educational progress, including the child’s progress in the general curriculum. First, the parents will be informed regarding their child’s present levels of educational performance through the development of the IEP. Section 300.347(a)(1) requires that each IEP include:

* * * A statement of the child’s present levels of educational performance, including--(i) how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum; or (ii) for preschool children, as appropriate, how the disability affects the child’s participation in appropriate activities * * *

Further, Sec. 300.347(a)(7) sets forth new requirements for regularly informing parents about their child’s educational progress, as regularly as parents of nondisabled children are informed of their child’s progress. That section requires that the IEP include:

A statement of--(i) How the child’s progress toward the annual goals * * * will be measured; and (ii) how the child’s parents will be regularly informed (by such means as periodic report cards), at least as often as parents are informed of their nondisabled children’s progress, of--(A) their child’s progress toward the annual goals; and (B) the extent to which that progress is sufficient to enable the child to achieve the goals by the end of the year.

One method that public agencies could use in meeting this requirement would be to provide periodic report cards to the parents of students with disabilities that include both (1) the grading information provided for all children in the agency at the same intervals; and (2) the specific information required by Sec. 300.347(a)(7)(ii)(A) and (B).

Finally, the parents, as part of the IEP team, will participate at least once every 12 months in a review of their child’s educational progress. Section 300.343(c) requires that a public agency initiate and conduct a meeting, at which the IEP team:

* * * (1) Reviews the child’s IEP periodically, but not less than annually to determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved; and (2) revises the IEP as appropriate to address--(i) any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals * * * and in the general curriculum, if appropriate; (ii) The results of any reevaluation * * *; (iii) Information about the child provided to, or by, the parents * * *; (iv) The child’s anticipated needs; or (v) Other matters.

III. Preparing Students With Disabilities for Employment and Other Post-School Experiences

One of the primary purposes of the IDEA is to ``* * * ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for employment and independent living * * *’’ (Sec. 300.1(a)). Section 701 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 describes the philosophy of independent living as including a philosophy of consumer control,
peer support, self-help, self-determination, equal access, and individual and system advocacy, in order to maximize the leadership, empowerment, independence, and productivity of individuals with disabilities, and the integration and full inclusion of individuals with disabilities into the mainstream of American society. Because many students receiving services under IDEA will also receive services under the Rehabilitation Act, it is important, in planning for their future, to consider the impact of both statutes.

Similarly, one of the key purposes of the IDEA Amendments of 1997 was to ``promote improved educational results for children with disabilities through early intervention, preschool, and educational experiences that prepare them for later educational challenges and employment.’’ (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 82 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 4 (1997)).

Thus, throughout their preschool, elementary, and secondary education, the IEPs for children with disabilities must, to the extent appropriate for each individual child, focus on providing instruction and experiences that enable the child to prepare himself or herself for later educational experiences and for post-school activities, including formal education, if appropriate, employment, and independent living. Many students with disabilities will obtain services through State vocational rehabilitation programs to ensure that their educational goals are effectively implemented in post- school activities. Services available through rehabilitation programs are consistent with the underlying purpose of IDEA.

Although preparation for adult life is a key component of FAPE throughout the educational experiences of students with disabilities, Part B sets forth specific requirements related to transition planning and transition services that must be implemented no later than ages 14 and 16, respectively, and which require an intensified focus on that preparation as these students begin and prepare to complete their secondary education.

11. What must the IEP team do to meet the requirements that the IEP include ``a statement of * * * transition service needs’’ beginning at age 14 (Sec. 300.347(b)(1)(i)),’’ and a statement of needed transition services’’ no later than age 16 (Sec. 300.347(b)(2)?

Section 300.347(b)(1) requires that, beginning no later than age 14, each student’s IEP include specific transition-related content, and, beginning no later than age 16, a statement of needed transition services:

Beginning at age 14 and younger if appropriate, and updated annually, each student’s IEP must include:

``* * * a statement of the transition service needs of the student under the applicable components of the student’s IEP that focuses on the student’s courses of study (such as participation in advanced-placement courses or a vocational education program)’’ (Sec. 300.347(b)(1)(i)).Beginning at age 16 (or younger, if determined appropriate by the IEP team), each student’s IEP must include:``* * * a statement of needed transition services for the student, including, if appropriate, a statement of the interagency responsibilities or any needed linkages.’’ (Sec. 300.347(b)(2)).The Committee Reports on the IDEA Amendments of 1997 make clear that the requirement added to the statute in 1997 that beginning at age 14, and updated annually, the IEP include ``a statement of the transition service needs’’ is ``* * * designed to augment, and not replace,’’ the separate, preexisting requirement that the IEP include, ``* * * beginning at age 16 (or younger, if determined appropriate by the IEP team), a statement of needed transition services * * *’’ (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 102 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 22 (1997)). As clarified by the Reports, ``The purpose of [the requirement in Sec. 300.347(b)(1)(i)] is to focus attention on how the child’s educational program can be planned to help the child make a successful transition to his or her goals for life after secondary school.’’ (H. Rep. No. 105-95, pp. 101-102 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 22 (1997)). The Reports further explain that ``[F]or example, for a child whose transition goal is a job, a transition service could be teaching the child how to get to the job site on public transportation.’’ (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 102 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 22 (1997)).Thus, beginning at age 14, the IEP team, in determining appropriate measurable annual goals (including benchmarks or short- term objectives) and services for a student, must determine what instruction and educational experiences will assist the student to
prepare for transition from secondary education to post-secondary life.

The statement of transition service needs should relate directly to the student’s goals beyond secondary education, and show how planned studies are linked to these goals. For example, a student interested in exploring a career in computer science may have a statement of transition services needs connected to technology course work, while another student’s statement of transition services needs could describe why public bus transportation training is
important for future independence in the community.

Although the focus of the transition planning process may shift as the student approaches graduation, the IEP team must discuss specific
areas beginning at least at the age of 14 years and review these areas annually. As noted in the Committee Reports, a disproportionate number of students with disabilities drop out of school before they [FR Page 12475] complete their secondary education: ``Too many students with disabilities are failing courses and dropping out of school. Almost twice as many students with disabilities drop out as compared to students without disabilities.’’ (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 85 (1997), S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 5 (1997).)

To help reduce the number of students with disabilities that drop out, it is important that the IEP team work with each student with a disability and the student’s family to select courses of study that will be meaningful to the student’s future and motivate the student to complete his or her education.

This requirement is distinct from the requirement, at Sec. 300.347(b)(2), that the IEP include:

* * * beginning at age 16 (or younger, if determined appropriate by the IEP team), a statement of needed transition services for the child, including, if appropriate, a statement of the interagency responsibilities or any needed linkages.

The term ``transition services’’ is defined at Sec. 300.29 to mean:

* * * a coordinated set of activities for a student with a disability that--(1) Is designed within an outcome-oriented process, that promotes movement from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary education, vocational training, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living, or community participation; (2) Is based on the individual student’s needs, taking into account the student’s preferences and interests; and (3) Includes--(i) Instruction; (ii) Related services; (iii) Community experiences; (iv) The development of employment and other post- school adult living objectives; and (v) If appropriate, acquisition of daily living skills and functional vocational evaluation.

Thus, while Sec. 300.347(b)(1) requires that the IEP team begin by age 14 to address the student’s need for instruction that will assist the student to prepare for transition, the IEP must include by age 16 a statement of needed transition services under Sec. 300.347(b)(2) that includes a ``coordinated set of activities * * *, designed within an outcome-oriented process, that promotes movement from school to post-school activities * * *.’’ (Sec. 300.29) Section 300.344(b)(3) further requires that, in implementing Sec. 300.347(b)(1), public agencies (in addition to required participants for all IEP meetings), must also
invite a representative of any other agency that is likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services. Thus, Sec. 300.347(b)(2) requires a broader focus on coordination of services across, and linkages between, agencies beyond the SEA and LEA.

12. Must the IEP for each student with a disability, beginning no later than age 16, include all ``needed transition services,’’ as identified by the IEP team and consistent with the definition at Sec. 300.29, even if an agency other than the public agency will provide those services? What is the public agency’s responsibility if another agency fails to provide agreed-upon transition services?

Section 300.347(b)(2) requires that the IEP for each child with a disability, beginning no later than age 16, or younger if determined appropriate by the IEP team, include all ``needed transition services,’’ as identified by the IEP team and consistent with the definition at Sec. 300.29, regardless of whether the public agency or some other agency will provide those services. Section 300.347(b)(2) specifically requires that the statement of needed transition services include, ``* * * if appropriate, a statement of the interagency responsibilities or any needed linkages.’’

Further, the IDEA Amendments of 1997 also permit an LEA to use up to five percent of the Part B funds it receives in any fiscal year in combination with other amounts, which must include amounts other than education funds, to develop and implement a coordinated services system. These funds may be used for activities such as: (1) linking IEPs under Part B and Individualized Family Service Plans (IFSPs) under Part C, with Individualized Service Plans developed under multiple Federal and State programs, such as Title I of the Rehabilitation Act; and (2) developing and implementing interagency financing strategies for the provision of services, including transition services under Part B.

The need to include, as part of a student’s IEP, transition services to be provided by agencies other than the public agency is contemplated by Sec. 300.348(a), which specifies what the public agency must do if another agency participating in the development of the statement of needed transition services fails to provide a needed transition service that it had agreed to provide.

If an agreed-upon service by another agency is not provided, the public agency responsible for the student’s education must implement alternative strategies to meet the student’s needs. This requires that the public agency provide the services, or convene an IEP meeting as soon as possible to identify alternative strategies to meet the transition services objectives, and to revise the IEP accordingly.
 

Alternative strategies might include the identification of another funding source, referral to another agency, the public agency’s identification of other district-wide or community resources that it can use to meet the student’s identified needs appropriately, or a combination of these strategies. As emphasized by Sec. 300.348(b), however:

Nothing in [Part B] relieves any participating agency, including a State vocational rehabilitation agency, of the responsibility to provide or pay for any transition service that the agency would otherwise provide to students with disabilities who meet the eligibility criteria of that agency.

However, the fact that an agency other than the public agency does not fulfill its responsibility does not relieve the public agency of its responsibility to ensure that FAPE is available to each student with a disability. (Section 300.142(b)(2) specifically requires that if an agency other than the LEA fails to provide or pay for a special education or related service (which could include a transition service), the LEA must, without delay, provide or pay for the service, and may then claim reimbursement from the agency that failed to provide or pay for the service.)

13. Under what circumstances must a public agency invite representatives from other agencies to an IEP meeting at which a child’s need for transition services will be considered?

Section 300.344 requires that, ``In implementing the requirements of [Sec. 300.347(b)(1)(ii) requiring a statement of needed transition services], the public agency shall also invite a representative of any other agency that is likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services.’’ To meet this requirement, the public agency must identify all agencies that are ``likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services’’ for each student
addressed by Sec. 300.347(b)(1), and must invite each of those agencies to the IEP meeting; and if an agency invited to send a representative to a meeting does not do so, the public agency must take other steps to obtain the participation of that agency in the planning of any transition services.

If, during the course of an IEP meeting, the team identifies additional agencies that are ``likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services’’ for the student, the public agency must determine how it will meet the requirements of Sec. 300.344.

IV. Other Questions Regarding the Development and Content of IEPS


14. For a child with a disability receiving special education for the first time, when must an IEP be developed--before or after the child begins to receive special education and related services?

Section 300.342(b)(1) requires that an IEP be ``in effect before special education and related services are provided to an eligible child * * *’’ (Italics added.)

The appropriate placement for a particular child with a disability cannot be determined until after decisions have been made about the child’s needs and the services that the public agency will provide to meet those needs. These decisions must be made at the IEP meeting, and it would not be permissible first to place the child and then develop the IEP. Therefore, the IEP must be developed before placement. (Further, the child’s placement must be based, among
other factors, on the child’s IEP.)

This requirement does not preclude temporarily placing an eligible child with a disability in a program as part of the evaluation process--before the IEP is finalized--to assist a public agency in determining the appropriate placement for the child. However, it is essential that the temporary placement not become the final placement before the IEP is finalized. In order to ensure that this does not happen, the State might consider requiring LEAs to take the following actions:

a. Develop an interim IEP for the child that sets out the specific conditions and timelines for the trial placement. (See paragraph c,
following.)
b. Ensure that the parents agree to the interim placement before it is carried out, and that they are involved throughout the [FR Page 12476] process of developing, reviewing, and revising the child’s IEP.

c. Set a specific timeline (e.g., 30 days) for completing the evaluation, finalizing the IEP, and determining the appropriate placement for the child.

d. Conduct an IEP meeting at the end of the trial period in order to finalize the child’s IEP.

15. Who is responsible for ensuring the development of IEPs for children with disabilities served by a public agency other than an LEA?

The answer as to which public agency has direct responsibility for ensuring the development of IEPs for children with disabilities served by a public agency other than an LEA will vary from State to State, depending upon State law, policy, or practice. The SEA is ultimately responsible for ensuring that all Part B requirements, including the IEP requirements, are met for eligible children within the State, including those children served by a public agency other
than an LEA. Thus, the SEA must ensure that every eligible child with a disability in the State has FAPE available, regardless of which State or local agency is responsible for educating the child. (The only exception to this responsibility is that the SEA is not responsible for ensuring that FAPE is made available to children with disabilities who are convicted as adults under State law and incarcerated in adult prisons, if the State has assigned that responsibility to a public agency other than the SEA. (See Sec. 300.600(d)).

Although the SEA has flexibility in deciding the best means to meet this obligation (e.g., through interagency agreements), the SEA must ensure that no eligible child with a disability is denied FAPE due to jurisdictional disputes among agencies.

When an LEA is responsible for the education of a child with a disability, the LEA remains responsible for developing the child’s IEP, regardless of the public or private school setting into which it places the child.

16. For a child placed out of State by an educational or non- educational State or local agency, is the placing or receiving State responsible for the child’s IEP?

Regardless of the reason for the placement, the ``placing’’ State is responsible for ensuring that the child’s IEP is developed and that it is implemented. The determination of the specific agency in the placing State that is responsible for the child’s IEP would be based on State law, policy, or practice. However, the SEA in the placing State is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the child has FAPE available.

17. If a disabled child has been receiving special education from one public agency and transfers to another public agency in the same State, must the new public agency develop an IEP before the child can be placed in a special education program?

If a child with a disability moves from one public agency to another in the same State, the State and its public agencies have an ongoing responsibility to ensure that FAPE is made available to that child. This means that if a child moves to another public agency the new agency is responsible for ensuring that the child has available special education and related services in conformity with an IEP.

The new public agency must ensure that the child has an IEP in effect before the agency can provide special education and related services. The new public agency may meet this responsibility by either adopting the IEP the former public agency developed for the child or by developing a new IEP for the child. (The new public agency is strongly encouraged to continue implementing the IEP developed by the former public agency, if appropriate, especially if
the parents believe their child was progressing appropriately under that IEP.)

Before the child’s IEP is finalized, the new public agency may provide interim services agreed to by both the parents and the new public agency. If the parents and the new public agency are unable to agree on an interim IEP and placement, the new public agency must implement the old IEP to the extent possible until a new IEP is developed and implemented.

In general, while the new public agency must conduct an IEP meeting, it would not be necessary if: (1) A copy of the child’s current IEP is available; (2) the parents indicate that they are satisfied with the current IEP; and (3) the new public agency determines that the current IEP is appropriate and can be implemented as written.

If the child’s current IEP is not available, or if either the new public agency or the parent believes that it is not appropriate, the new public agency must develop a new IEP through appropriate procedures within a short time after the child enrolls in the new public agency (normally, within one week).

18. What timelines apply to the development and implementation of an initial IEP for a child with a disability?

Section 300.343(b) requires each public agency to ensure that within a reasonable period of time following the agency’s receipt of parent consent to an initial evaluation of a child, the child is evaluated and, if determined eligible, special education and related services are made available to the child in accordance with an IEP. The section further requires the agency to conduct a meeting to develop an IEP for the child within 30 days of determining that the child needs special education and related services.

Section 300.342(b)(2) provides that an IEP must be implemented as soon as possible following the meeting in which the IEP is developed.

19. Must a public agency hold separate meetings to determine a child’s eligibility for special education and related services, develop the child’s IEP, and determine the child’s placement, or may the agency meet all of these requirements in a single meeting?

A public agency may, after a child is determined by ``a group of qualified professionals and the parent’’ (see Sec. 300.534(a)(1)) to be a child with a disability, continue in the same meeting to develop an IEP for the child and then to determine the child’s placement. However, the public agency must ensure that it meets: (1) the requirements of Sec. 300.535 regarding eligibility decisions; (2) all of the Part B requirements regarding meetings to develop IEPs (including providing appropriate notification to the parents, consistent with the requirements of Secs. 300.345, 300.503, and 300.504, and ensuring that all the required team members participate in the development of the IEP, consistent with the requirements of Sec. 300.344;) and (3) ensuring that the placement is made by the required individuals, including the parent, as required by Secs. 300.552 and 300.501(c).

20. How frequently must a public agency conduct meetings to review, and, if appropriate, revise the IEP for each child with a disability?

A public agency must initiate and conduct meetings periodically, but at least once every twelve months, to review each child’s IEP, in order to determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved, and to revise the IEP, as appropriate, to address: (a) Any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals and in the general curriculum, if appropriate; (b) the results of any reevaluation; (c) information about the child provided to, or by, the parents; (d) the child’s anticipated needs; or (e) other matters (Sec. 300.343(c)).

A public agency also must ensure that an IEP is in effect for each child at the beginning of each school year (Sec. 300.342(a)). It may conduct IEP meetings at any time during the year. However, if the agency conducts the IEP meeting prior to the beginning of the next school year, it must ensure that the IEP contains the necessary special education and related services and supplementary aids and services to ensure that the student’s IEP can be appropriately implemented during the next school year. Otherwise, it would be necessary for the public agency to conduct another IEP meeting.

Although the public agency is responsible for determining when it is necessary to conduct an IEP meeting, the parents of a child with a disability have the right to request an IEP meeting at any time. For example, if the parents believe that the child is not progressing satisfactorily or that there is a problem with the child’s current IEP, it would be appropriate for the parents to request an IEP meeting.

If a child’s teacher feels that the child’s IEP or placement is not appropriate for the child, the teacher should follow agency procedures with respect to: (1) calling or meeting with the parents or (2) requesting the agency to hold another IEP meeting to review the child’s IEP.

The legislative history of Public Law 94-142 makes it clear that there should be as many meetings a year as any one child may need (121 Cong. Rec. S20428-29 (Nov. 19, 1975) (remarks of Senator Stafford)). Public agencies should grant any reasonable parent request for an
IEP meeting. For example, if the parents question the adequacy of services that are provided while their child is suspended for short periods of time, it would be appropriate to convene an IEP meeting.

In general, if either a parent or a public agency believes that a required component of the student’s IEP should be changed, the public agency must conduct an IEP meeting if it believes that a change in the IEP may be necessary to ensure the provision of FAPE.

If a parent requests an IEP meeting because the parent believes that a change is needed [FR Page 12477] in the provision of FAPE to the child or the educational placement of the child, and the agency refuses to convene an IEP meeting to determine whether such a change is needed, the agency must provide written notice to the parents of the refusal, including an explanation of why the agency has determined that conducting the meeting is not necessary to ensure the provision of FAPE to the student.

Under Sec. 300.507(a), the parents or agency may initiate a due process hearing at any time regarding any proposal or refusal regarding the identification,revaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of FAPE to the child, and the public agency must inform parents about the availability of mediation.

21. May IEP meetings be audio- or video-tape-recorded?

Part B does not address the use of audio or video recording devices at IEP meetings, and no other Federal statute either authorizes or prohibits the recording of an IEP meeting by either a parent or a school official. Therefore, an SEA or public agency has the option to require, prohibit, limit, or otherwise regulate the use of recording devices at IEP meetings.

If a public agency has a policy that prohibits or limits the use of recording devices at IEP meetings, that policy must provide for exceptions if they are necessary to ensure that the parent understands the IEP or the IEP process or to implement other parental rights guaranteed under Part B. An SEA or school district that adopts a rule regulating the tape recording of IEP meetings also should ensure that it is uniformly applied.

Any recording of an IEP meeting that is maintained by the public agency is an ``education record,’’ within the meaning of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (``FERPA’’; 20 U.S.C. 1232g), and would, therefore, be subject to the confidentiality requirements of the regulations under both FERPA (34 CFR part 99) and part B (Secs. 300.560-300.575).

Parents wishing to use audio or video recording devices at IEP meetings should consult State or local policies for further guidance.

22. Who can serve as the representative of the public agency at an IEP meeting?

The IEP team must include a representative of the public agency who: (a) Is qualified to provide, or supervise the provision of, specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of children with disabilities; (b) is knowledgeable about the general curriculum; and (c) is knowledgeable about the availability of resources of the public agency (Sec. 300.344(a)(4)).

Each public agency may determine which specific staff member will serve as the agency representative in a particular IEP meeting, so long as the individual meets these requirements. It is important, however, that the agency representative have the authority to commit agency resources and be able to ensure that whatever services are set out in the IEP will actually be provided.

A public agency may designate another public agency member of the IEP team to also serve as the agency representative, so long as that individual meets the requirements of Sec. 300.344(a)(4).

23. For a child with a disability being considered for initial provision of special education and related services, which teacher or teachers should attend the IEP meeting?

A child’s IEP team must include at least one of the child’s regular education teachers (if the child is, or may be participating in the regular education environment) and at least one of the child’s special education teachers, or, if appropriate, at least one of the child’s special education providers (Sec. 300.344(a)(2) and (3)).

Each IEP must include a statement of the present levels of educational performance, including a statement of how the child’s
disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum (Sec. 300.347(a)(1)). At least one regular education teacher is a required member of the IEP team of a child who is, or may be, participating in the regular educational environment, regardless of the extent of that participation.

The requirements of Sec. 300.344(a)(3) can be met by either: (1) a special education teacher of the child; or (2) another special education provider of the child, such as a speech pathologist, physical or occupational therapist, etc., if the related service consists of specially designed instruction and is considered special education under applicable State standards.

Sometimes more than one meeting is necessary in order to finalize a child’s IEP. In this process, if the special education teacher or special education provider who will be working with the child is identified, it would be useful to have that teacher or provider participate in the meeting with the parents and other members of the IEP team in finalizing the IEP. If this is not possible, the public agency must ensure that the teacher or provider has access to the child’s IEP as soon as possible after it is finalized and before beginning to work with the child.

Further, (consistent with Sec. 300.342(b)), the public agency must ensure that each regular education teacher, special education teacher, related services provider and other service provider of an eligible child under this part (1) has access to the child’s IEP, and (2) is informed of his or her specific responsibilities related to implementing the IEP, and of the specific accommodations, modifications, and supports that must be provided to the child in
accordance with the IEP. This requirement is crucial to ensuring that each child receives FAPE in accordance with his or her IEP, and that the IEP is appropriately and effectively implemented.

24. What is the role of a regular education teacher in the development, review and revision of the IEP for a child who is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment?

As required by Sec. 300.344(a)(2), the IEP team for a child with a disability must include at least one regular education teacher of the child if the child is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment. Section 300.346(d) further specifies that the regular education teacher of a child with a disability, as a member of the IEP team, must, to the extent appropriate, participate in the development, review, and revision of the child’s IEP, including assisting in--(1) the determination of appropriate positive behavioral interventions and strategies for the child; and (2) the determination of supplementary aids and services, program modifications, and supports for school personnel that will be provided for the child, consistent with 300.347(a)(3) (Sec. 300.344(d)).

Thus, while a regular education teacher must be a member of the IEP team if the child is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment, the teacher need not (depending upon the child’s needs and the purpose of the specific IEP team meeting) be required to participate in all decisions made as part of the meeting or to be present throughout the entire meeting or attend every meeting. For example, the regular education teacher who is a member of the IEP team must participate in discussions and decisions about how to modify the general curriculum in the regular classroom to ensure the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum and participation in the regular education environment.

Depending upon the specific circumstances, however, it may not be necessary for the regular education teacher to participate in discussions and decisions regarding, for example, the physical therapy needs of the child, if the teacher is not responsible for implementing that portion of the child’s IEP.

In determining the extent of the regular education teacher’s participation at IEP meetings, public agencies and parents should discuss and try to reach agreement on whether the child’s regular education teacher that is a member of the IEP team should be present at a particular IEP meeting and, if so, for what period of time. The extent to which it would be appropriate for the regular education teacher member of the IEP team to participate in IEP meetings must be decided on a case-by-case basis.

25. If a child with a disability attends several regular classes, must all of the child’s regular education teachers be members of the child’s IEP team?

No. The IEP team need not include more than one regular education teacher of the child. If the participation of more than one regular education teacher would be beneficial to the child’s success in school (e.g., in terms of enhancing the child’s participation in the general curriculum), it would be appropriate for them to attend the meeting.

26. How should a public agency determine which regular education teacher and special education teacher will be members of the IEP team for a particular child with a disability?

The regular education teacher who serves as a member of a child’s IEP team should be a teacher who is, or may be, responsible for implementing a portion of the IEP, so that the teacher can participate in discussions about how best to teach the child.

If the child has more than one regular education teacher responsible for carrying out a portion of the IEP, the LEA may designate which teacher or teachers will serve as IEP team member(s), taking into account the best interest of the child.

In a situation in which not all of the child’s regular education teachers are members of [FR Page 12478] the child’s IEP team, the LEA is strongly encouraged to seek input from the teachers who will not be attending. In addition, (consistent with Sec. 300.342(b)), the LEA must ensure that each regular education teacher (as well as each special education teacher, related services provider, and other service provider) of an eligible child under this part (1) has access to the child’s IEP, and (2) is informed of his or her specific responsibilities related to implementing the IEP, and of the specific accommodations, modifications and supports that must be provided to the child in accordance with the IEP.

In the case of a child whose behavior impedes the learning of the child or others, the LEA is encouraged to have a regular education teacher or other person knowledgeable about positive behavior strategies at the IEP meeting. This is especially important if the regular education teacher is expected to carry out portions of the IEP.

Similarly, the special education teacher or provider of the child who is a member of the child’s IEP team should be the person who is, or will be, responsible for implementing the IEP. If, for example, the child’s disability is a speech impairment, the special education teacher on the IEP team could be the speech-language pathologist.

27. For a child whose primary disability is a speech impairment, may a public agency meet its responsibility under Sec. 300.344(a)(3) to ensure that the IEP team includes ``at least one special education teacher, or, if appropriate, at least one special education provider of the child’’ by including a speech-language pathologist on the IEP team?

Yes, if speech is considered special education under State standards. As with other children with disabilities, the IEP team must also include at least one of the child’s regular education teachers if the child is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment.

28. Do parents and public agencies have the option of inviting any individual of their choice be participants on their child’s IEP team?

The IEP team may, at the discretion of the parent or the agency, include ``other individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child * * *’’ (Sec. 300.344(a)(6), italics added). Under Sec. 300.344(a)(6), these individuals are members of the IEP team. This is a change from prior law, which provided, without qualification, that parents or agencies could have other individuals as members of the IEP team at the discretion of the parents or agency.

Under Sec. 300.344(c), the determination as to whether an individual has knowledge or special expertise, within the meaning of Sec. 300.344(a)(6), shall be made by the parent or public agency who has invited the individual to be a member of the IEP team.

Part B does not provide for including individuals such as representatives of teacher organizations as part of an IEP team, unless they are included because of knowledge or special expertise regarding the child. (Because a representative of a teacher organization would generally be concerned with the interests of the teacher rather than the interests of the child, and generally would not possess knowledge or expertise regarding the child, it generally would be inappropriate for such an official to be a member of the IEP team or to otherwise participate in an IEP meeting.)

29. Can parents or public agencies bring their attorneys to IEP meetings, and, if so under what circumstances? Are attorney’s fees available for parents’ attorneys if the parents are prevailing parties in actions or proceedings brought under Part B?

Section 300.344(a)(6) authorizes the addition to the IEP team of other individuals at the discretion of the parent or the public agency only if those other individuals have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child. The determination of whether an attorney possesses knowledge or special expertise regarding the child would have to be made on a case-by-case basis by the parent or public agency inviting the attorney to be a member of the team.

The presence of the agency’s attorney could contribute to a potentially adversarial atmosphere at the meeting. The same is true with regard to the presence of an attorney accompanying the parents at the IEP meeting. Even if the attorney possessed knowledge or special expertise regarding the child (Sec. 300.344(a)(6)), an attorney’s presence would have the potential for creating an adversarial atmosphere that would not necessarily be in the best interests of the child.

Therefore, the attendance of attorneys at IEP meetings should be strongly discouraged. Further, as specified in Section 615(i)(3)(D)(ii) of the Act and Sec. 300.513(c)(2)(ii), Attorneys’ fees may not be awarded relating to any meeting of the IEP team unless the meeting is convened as a result of an administrative proceeding or judicial action, or, at the discretion of the State, for a mediation conducted prior to the request for a due process hearing.

30. Must related services personnel attend IEP meetings?

Although Part B does not expressly require that the IEP team include related services personnel as part of the IEP team (Sec. 300.344(a)), it is appropriate for those persons to be included if a particular related service is to be discussed as part of the IEP meeting. Section 300.344(a)(6) provides that the IEP team also includes ``at the discretion of the parent or the agency, other individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child, including related services personnel as appropriate. * * *’’ (Italics added.)

Further, Sec. 300.344(a)(3) requires that the IEP team for each child with a disability include ``at least one special education teacher, or, if appropriate, at least one special education provider of the child * * *’’ This requirement can be met by the participation of either (1) a special education teacher of the child, or (2) another special education provider such as a speech- language pathologist, physical or occupational therapist, etc., if the related service consists of specially designed instruction and is considered special education under the applicable State standard.

If a child with a disability has an identified need for related services, it would be appropriate for the related services personnel to attend the meeting or otherwise be involved in developing the IEP. As explained in the Committee Reports on the IDEA Amendments of 1997, ``Related services personnel should be included on the team when a particular related service will be discussed at the request of the child’s parents or the school.’’ (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 103 (1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 23 (1997)). For example, if the child’s evaluation indicates the need for a specific related service (e.g., physical therapy, occupational therapy, special transportation services, school social work services, school health services, or counseling), the agency should ensure that a qualified provider of that service either (1) attends the IEP meeting, or (2) provides a written recommendation concerning the nature, frequency, and amount of service to be provided to the child. This written recommendation could be a part of the evaluation report.

A public agency must ensure that all individuals who are necessary to develop an IEP that will meet the child’s unique needs, and ensure
the provision of FAPE to the child, participate in the child’s IEP meeting.

31. Must the public agency ensure that all services specified in a child’s IEP are provided?

Yes. The public agency must ensure that all services set forth in the child’s IEP are provided, consistent with the child’s needs as identified in the IEP. The agency may provide each of those services directly, through its own staff resources; indirectly, by contracting with another public or private agency; or through other arrangements. In providing the services, the agency may use whatever State, local, Federal, and private sources of support are available for those purposes (see Sec. 300.301(a)); but the services must be at no cost to the parents, and the public agency remains responsible for ensuring that the IEP services are provided in a manner that appropriately meets the student’s needs as specified in the IEP. The SEA and responsible public agency may not allow the failure of another agency to provide service(s) described in the child’s IEP to deny or delay the provision of FAPE to the child. (See Sec. 300.142, Methods of ensuring services.)

32. Is it permissible for an agency to have the IEP completed before the IEP meeting begins?

No. Agency staff may come to an IEP meeting prepared with evaluation findings and proposed recommendations regarding IEP content, but the agency must make it clear to the parents at the outset of the meeting that the services proposed by the agency are only recommendations for review and discussion with the parents. Parents have the right to bring questions, concerns, and recommendations to an IEP meeting as part of a full discussion, of the child’s needs and the services to be provided to meet those needs before the IEP is finalized.

Public agencies must ensure that, if agency personnel bring drafts of some or all of the IEP content to the IEP meeting, there is a full discussion with the child’s parents, before [FR Page 12479] the child’s IEP is finalized, regarding drafted content and the child’s needs and the services to be provided to meet those needs.

33. Must a public agency include transportation in a child’s IEP as a related service?

As with other related services, a public agency must provide transportation as a related service if it is required to assist the disabled child to benefit from special education. (This includes transporting a preschool-aged child to the site at which the public agency provides special education and related services to the child, if that site is different from the site at which the child receives other preschool or day care services.)

In determining whether to include transportation in a child’s IEP, and whether the child needs to receive transportation as a related service, it would be appropriate to have at the IEP meeting a person with expertise in that area. In making this determination, the IEP team must consider how the child’s disability affects the child’s need for transportation, including determining whether the child’s disability prevents the child from using the same transportation provided to nondisabled children, or from getting to school in the same manner as nondisabled children.

The public agency must ensure that any transportation service included in a child’s IEP as a related service is provided at public expense and at no cost to the parents, and that the child’s IEP describes the transportation arrangement.

Even if a child’s IEP team determines that the child does not require transportation as a related service, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, requires that the child receive the same transportation provided to nondisabled children. If a public agency transports nondisabled children, it must transport disabled children under the same terms and conditions. However, if a child’s IEP team determines that the child does not need transportation as a related service, and the public agency transports only those children whose IEPs specify transportation as a related service, and does not transport nondisabled children, the public agency would not be required to provide transportation to a disabled child.

It should be assumed that most children with disabilities receive the same transportation services as nondisabled children. For some children with disabilities, integrated transportation may be achieved by providing needed accommodations such as lifts and other equipment adaptations on regular school transportation vehicles.

34. Must a public agency provide related services that are required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education, whether or not those services are included in the list of related services in Sec. 300.24?

The list of related services is not exhaustive and may include other developmental, corrective, or supportive services if they are required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education. This could, depending upon the unique needs of a child, include such services as nutritional services or service coordination.

These determinations must be made on an individual basis by each child’s IEP team.

35. Must the IEP specify the amount of services or may it simply list the services to be provided?

The amount of services to be provided must be stated in the IEP, so that the level of the agency’s commitment of resources will be clear to parents and other IEP team members (Sec. 300.347(a)(6)). The amount of time to be committed to each of the various services to be provided must be (1) appropriate to the specific service, and (2) stated in the IEP in a manner that is clear to all who are involved in both the development and implementation of the IEP.

The amount of a special education or related service to be provided to a child may be stated in the IEP as a range (e.g., speech therapy to be provided three times per week for 30-45 minutes per session) only if the IEP team determines that stating the amount of services as a range is necessary to meet the unique needs of the child. For example, it would be appropriate for the IEP to specify, based upon the IEP team’s determination of the student’s unique needs, that particular services are needed only under specific circumstances, such as the occurrence of a seizure or of a particular behavior. A range may not be used because of personnel shortages or uncertainty regarding the availability of staff.

36. Under what circumstances is a public agency required to permit a child with a disability to use a school-purchased assistive technology device in the child’s home or in another setting?

Each child’s IEP team must consider the child’s need for assistive technology (AT) in the development of the child’s IEP (Sec. 300.346(a)(2)(v)); and the nature and extent of the AT devices and services to be provided to the child must be reflected in the child’s IEP (Sec. 300.346(c)).

A public agency must permit a child to use school-purchased assistive technology devices at home or in other settings, if the IEP team determines that the child needs access to those devices in nonschool settings in order to receive FAPE (to complete homework, for example).

Any assistive technology devices that are necessary to ensure FAPE must be provided at no cost to the parents, and the parents cannot be charged for normal use, wear and tear. However, while ownership of the devices in these circumstances would remain with the public agency, State law, rather than Part B, generally would govern whether parents are liable for loss, theft, or damage due to negligence or misuse of publicly owned equipment used at home or in other settings in accordance with a child’s IEP.

37. Can the IEP team also function as the group making the placement decision for a child with a disability?

Yes, a public agency may use the IEP team to make the placement decision for a child, so long as the group making the placement decision meets the requirements of Secs. 300.552 and 300.501(c), which requires that the placement decision be made by a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options.

38. If a child’s IEP includes behavioral strategies to address a particular behavior, can a child ever be suspended for engaging in that behavior?

If a child’s behavior impedes his or her learning or that of others, the IEP team, in developing the child’s IEP, must consider, if appropriate, development of strategies, including positive behavioral interventions, strategies and supports to address that behavior, consistent with Sec. 300.346(a)(2)(i). This means that in most cases in which a child’s behavior that impedes his or her learning or that of others is, or can be readily anticipated to be, repetitive, proper development of the child’s IEP will include the development of strategies, including positive behavioral interventions, strategies and supports to address that behavior. See Sec. 300.346(c). This includes behavior that could violate a school code of conduct. A failure to, if appropriate, consider and address these behaviors in developing and implementing the child’s IEP would constitute a denial of FAPE to the child. Of course, in appropriate circumstances, the IEP team, which includes the child’s parents, might determine that the child’s behavioral intervention plan includes specific regular or alternative disciplinary measures, such as denial of certain privileges or short suspensions, that would result from particular infractions of school rules, along with positive behavior intervention strategies and supports, as a part of a comprehensive plan to address the child’s behavior. Of course, if short suspensions that are included in a child’s IEP are being implemented in a manner that denies the child access to the ability to progress in the educational program, the child would be denied FAPE.

Whether other disciplinary measures, including suspension, are ever appropriate for behavior that is addressed in a child’s IEP will have to be determined on a case by case basis in light of the particular circumstances of that incident. However, school personnel may not use their ability to suspend a child for 10 days or less at a time on multiple occasions in a school year as a means of avoiding appropriately considering and addressing the child’s behavior as a part of providing FAPE to the child.

39. If a child’s behavior in the regular classroom, even with appropriate interventions, would significantly impair the learning of others, can the group that makes the placement decision determine that placement in the regular classroom is inappropriate for that child?

The IEP team, in developing the IEP, is required to consider, when appropriate, strategies, including positive behavioral interventions, strategies and supports to address the behavior of a child with a disability whose behavior impedes his or her learning or that of others. If the IEP team determines that such supports, strategies or interventions are necessary to address the behavior of the child, those services must be included in the child’s IEP. These provisions are designed to foster increased participation of children with disabilities in regular [FR Page 12480] education environments or other less restrictive environments, not to serve as a basis for placing children with disabilities in more restrictive settings.

The determination of appropriate placement for a child whose behavior is interfering with the education of others requires careful consideration of whether the child can appropriately function in the regular classroom if provided appropriate behavioral supports, strategies and interventions. If the child can appropriately function in the regular classroom with appropriate behavioral supports, strategies or interventions, placement in a more restrictive environment would be inconsistent with the least restrictive environment provisions of the IDEA. If the child’s behavior in the regular classroom, even with the provision of appropriate behavioral supports, strategies or interventions, would significantly impair the learning of others, that placement would not meet his or her needs
and would not be appropriate for that child.

40. May school personnel during a school year implement more than one short-term removal of a child with disabilities from his or her classroom or school for misconduct?

Yes. Under Sec. 300.520(a)(1), school personnel may order removal of a child with a disability from the child’s current placement for not more than 10 consecutive school days for any violation of school rules, and additional removals of not more than 10 consecutive school days in that same school year for separate incidents of misconduct, as long as these removals do not constitute a change of placement under Sec. 300.519(b). However, these removals are permitted only to the extent they are consistent with discipline that is applied to children without disabilities. Also, school personnel should be aware of constitutional due process protections that apply to suspensions of all children. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975). Section 300.121(d) addresses the extent of the obligation to provide services after a child with a disability has been removed from his or her current placement for more than 10 school days in the same school year. [FR Page 12506]
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Return to Top

Under IDEA 2004, what Is My Role as a General or Special Education Teacher in developing the IEP?


''How can I possibly meet the curriculum standards for this student? I`m especially worried that this child will take all of my attention and that I won't have time for the rest of my students.``


What Is My Role as a General Education Teacher?

Stephanie, a student with a severe learning disability, is entering my classroom this year. I've just been informed that I'm going to be a member of Stephanie's IEP team. This is new territory for me. What is my role?

Each student who receives special education and related services under IDEA must have an Individualized Education Program, or IEP. And one of the most
significant changes in the new IDEA is the inclusion of at least one of the student's general education teachers on the IEP team. As a content specialist, it's critical for you to be involved in the process of developing Stephanie's IEP. You're the educator with the knowledge base to develop an appropriate IEP as it
relates to the curriculum. You'll also be able to suggest supplementary aids, services, or changes to the IEP that will help you do your job and help Stephanie reach her full potential.

Who are the other members of the IEP team?

The IEP team should include the following people:

• parent and/or legal guardian

• special education teacher

• general education teacher

• individual who can interpret instructional implications of evaluation results

• other individuals—at the discretion of the parent or agency—who have special knowledge or expertise about the student, including related services personnel

• school system representative who is qualified to provide or supervise specially designed instruction for children with disabilities and who is knowledgeable about the general curriculum and the availability of resources

• transition services agency representative, for students at least 14 and over

• student, as appropriate

Will I get any release time for IEP meetings? Where and how often will they take place?

The IEP team usually meets at the school site at least once a year, although additional meetings may be necessary. As the general education teacher, you
may not have to be present throughout an entire IEP meeting, or participate in discussions about issues for which you have no responsibility. The IEP team helps decide how much of your participation is needed, depending on the nature of the student's needs and the purpose of the IEP meeting.

IEP meetings can be held at varying times. If necessary, you can ask your principal for release time to attend these meetings. Some best practices include
writing release time into the IEP for future meetings, holding IEP meetings during a common planning period, providing substitutes for classroom teachers if the meetings are held during the school day, and providing remuneration if the meetings are held after school hours. Some school districts have contract language that promotes these practices.

Whether or not you physically attend the IEP meeting, the school district is required to provide you with access to the student's IEP. In addition, you must
be informed of your responsibilities in implementing the IEP. For example, if certain accommodations or modifications need to be in place in your classroom,
you should be notified.

When will I get time to meet with members of the IEP team outside of IEP meetings?

During the course of the school year, you may need to meet with the special education teacher or other members of Stephanie's team to share information
and implement the program. Team members need time to confer on an ongoing basis and the support of the administration to provide for that time.

Enlightened administrators are employing a number of different strategies to provide adequate planning time for their staff:

Joint planning time. Several classes of students are scheduled to attend art, music, or special lessons while their general and special education teachers
meet.

Grade-level meetings. Special education teachers attend grade-level staff meetings to confer with general education teachers.

Weekly conference times. Some districts have built weekly conference times into their teachers' schedules. Also, individual teachers frequently establish
informal meeting times to confer.

Whatever strategies you use, it helps to have supportive administrators who realize that planning time is crucial.

How do I make sure I get the information and support I need to teach Stephanie?

Supports for personnel can be written into an IEP and can take a number of different forms:

Staff training. The team can write into the IEP that all staff working with the student will receive appropriate training, at no extra cost to the staff. For
instance, if a student has autism, staff members may need training in how to deal with that specific disability.

Classroom aides. Some IEPs may require para-educators as classroom aides. Para-educators who are properly trained and supervised can work with
individual students, small groups, or the entire class. These aides may provide necessary physical, as well as academic, support.

Co-teaching. In many schools, general education and special education teachers are co-teaching classes. IDEA '97 allows for increased flexibility in
addressing the needs of all students. One result is that special education personnel can now teach within the general education environment, even if the
students they are working with are not identified as having special needs. This can reduce the burden on both teachers and provide a wonderful opportunity
for all of the students to benefit from the expertise and attention of two professionals.

Release time. Conference time to plan for IEP meetings can be included in the IEP under support for personnel.

Supports for the student, in the form of accommodations and modifications, can be written into the IEP as well. Accommodations usually involve changes made to materials, facilities, or work time. Modifications usually involve changes in workload or curriculum expectations.

Am I supposed to make sure Stephanie keeps up with my general education students?

Yes, if that's the stated goal in the IEP. Your expectations for Stephanie's performance level will depend on what's in her IEP. Your general curriculum will not change. Instead, you'll work in conjunction with Stephanie's special education teacher to develop accommodations and modifications that will allow Stephanie to learn material from the general curriculum. For example, if Stephanie has fine-motor difficulties due to her disability, she might be allowed to do part of the math homework, or she might need an assistive technology device, such as a laptop, to help her complete all of the math problems. If her disability involves memory difficulties, she might be allowed to use an open book during an exam or listen to a book on tape. There are many examples of assistive technology devices—such as laptops, books on tape, and voice recognition software—that can help Stephanie and other students with disabilities access the general curriculum.

But is it really fair for Stephanie to receive this special treatment, then be graded the same as the other students?

In such cases, the definition of fair does not mean equal treatment. Fair means that each student receives what he or she needs to be successful and reach his or her full potential. Teachers make reasonable accommodations for other students on a daily basis.

For example, eyeglasses are an accommodation. If a student breaks or forgets his or her glasses, the teacher would move the student closer to the board or
have another student read to the student who needs glasses. This is not considered an unfair advantage, but something the student needs in order to be successful.

If a student in your math class has just arrived in this country and does not yet speak or read English well enough to tackle math word problems, you might
allow the student to skip the word problems and just do the calculations. Or you could have someone translate the word problems into the student's native language. You've modified the work the student is doing but still provided an opportunity for him or her to learn the material.

Do Stephanie's other general education teachers have a right to attend her IEP meeting if they have not been asked to do so? How can only one general education teacher speak for the other content specialists?

You have the right to ask to attend a meeting and the right to go, if invited by the parents or school administrators. If you have not been asked to participate,
however, the actual logistics are a gray area. You may want to consider the following suggestions:

• Suppose a high-school student has five general education teachers, and they all want to attend the meeting. Since, in some cases, general education teachers are not required to sit in on the entire meeting, they may be able to rotate through the meeting, replacing each other as soon as they've finished
discussing their subject area.

• If the team's general education teacher has already been designated, you can ask to attend as the individual who has special knowledge or expertise about the student.`` As one of Stephanie's teachers, you fit that description.

• Stephanie's parents can invite you to be a member of the IEP team if you have special knowledge or expertise about their child. Parents can be your best
advocates. Developing a good working relationship with them can be an advantage to both you and your student.

• Some secondary schools are passing out forms to all of a student's teachers before the IEP meeting. The filled-in forms are then shared at the meeting.

• As one of Stephanie's teachers, you can request that an IEP meeting be scheduled in order to discuss possible changes in her program. If the administration chooses not to schedule a meeting, and your continued efforts to resolve some of your concerns are not successful, you can contact your local or state NEA affiliate to request assistance.

What if I disagree with the other members of Stephanie's team on her placement or some other aspect of her program? Who makes the final decision?

IEP teams do not take a formal vote, but final decisions are usually the result of a majority opinion. Once a decision is made, an administrator cannot legally
negate the team's decision; however, if parents disagree they may follow due process procedures or opt for mediation. If a teacher doesn't agree with the
team, he or she can write a dissenting opinion, which should be attached to the student's IEP form and become a part of the record. Some districts have a place on the IEP form for dissenting opinions. This document will be helpful later on if the teacher needs to call another meeting and ask for changes or additions to the student's IEP.

How do I protect myself from retaliation if I'm in disagreement with the administration or district over a student's IEP or my role in the process?

Are your concerns in your student's best interests? Individuals who are advocating on behalf of the disabled are protected from retaliation under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Document all of your efforts, and if you do have any problems, your local affiliate will be in a better position to help you.

What Is My Role as a Special Education Teacher?

I'm a special education teacher, and I've been told that the new IDEA requires me to write IEP goals and objectives based on the state curriculum standards
and the general curriculum. This is not my area of expertise. Do I really need to become a curriculum specialist to develop goals and objectives for my students?

No, you'll work with other members of the team to develop an IEP that meets curriculum standards. As a special education teacher, you bring your expertise
on instructional strategies to the team, while the general education teacher brings his or her expertise on standards-based information. Also, academic
standards are not the only expectations used to write a student's goals and objectives; behavioral expectations may be written into the IEP as well.

As the special education teacher, you're no longer expected to be the pull-out expert who takes students with special needs and ''fixes`` them in seclusion.
IDEA '97 provides special education teachers with an opportunity to work in collaboration with their colleagues as opposed to working in isolation. As a result of this collaboration, special education teachers are becoming more knowledgeable about the general curriculum, and general education teachers are, in turn, learning more about appropriate instructional strategies.

How can the general education teacher and I work together to develop goals and objectives that meet or address curriculum standards?

While general education teachers are content specialists, special education teachers are well versed in instructional strategies and the types of modifications their students need in order to be successful. If the general education teacher says the class will be studying algebraic formulas on a given
day, you'll know whether your students can handle the lesson or whether they will need modifications.

Talk with the general education teacher about the kind of accommodations or modifications he or she already uses in the classroom to meet the diverse
learning styles of the students. For example, a primary teacher may give pencil grips to children whose handwriting is not as well developed. And if students don't understand instructions the first time, teachers will automatically repeat, rephrase, and ask students to restate the instructions. A lot of teachers use visual organizers in their rooms—for example, writing the day's homework in a specific spot on the blackboard for students who are disorganized. Of course, this happens to be a great help for students with significant language or learning problems. Some California educators have been teaching bilingual students with strategies and methodologies that are identical to those special education teachers have been using for years.

How can special education and general education teachers get the support we need to actually implement the IEP process?

All members of the IEP team are important and have specific responsibilities. But the person representing the school system is key to actually carrying out
the process. It's important that he or she has the authority to commit school or district resources and to ensure that whatever services are written into the IEP
will actually be provided. It's also useful to put someone in charge of coordinating and monitoring all the services the student receives. The district is responsible for the following supports:

Time. As in dealing with any student, the school administration or district is responsible for ensuring that teachers and related service personnel have the time they need to meet, share curriculum goals and standards, and determine appropriate instructional strategies. Also, adequate planning time is an issue that can be addressed through the IEP and/or the collective bargaining process.

Personnel support. IDEA '97 allows the need for ''supplementary aids and services, program modifications, or support for school personnel`` to be written
into the student's IEP. Once in an IEP, these must be honored by the school system because the IEP is a legally binding document.

Staff development. General education teachers may need appropriate training to fully participate and understand their role in the IEP process. Special education personnel may need specific training to help them become more knowledgeable about the general curriculum, state standards, and benchmarks. Some states are including mandatory special education instruction for teacher candidates and veteran teachers. And many states require ongoing professional development for practicing teachers in order to maintain their licenses.

Collaboration skills. The IEP team is comprised of a number of people who must work together over a period a time to best meet the needs of the student. Specific instruction in team decision making and collaboration skills can help team members write and implement an effective IEP.


IDEA SAYS

The new IDEA emphasizes the student's participation in the general curriculum and expands the IEP team to include general education teachers.

• The IEP must provide an explanation of the extent, if any, to which the student will not participate with non-disabled children in the general classroom.

• At least one of the student's general education teachers must be involved in the development of the IEP. However, the general education teacher does not
have to remain in attendance throughout an entire meeting or discuss issues for which he or she has no responsibility.

• The IEP must specify the student's present levels of educational performance, how the student's disability affects progress in the general curriculum, special education and related services, supplementary aids and support services, program modifications for the student, and supports for school personnel.

• When developing a student's IEP, the IEP team must plan appropriately for what the law calls special factors, such as behavioral issues and the student's
specific communication needs (blindness or visual impairment, deafness or hearing problems, or limited English proficiency). The team must also consider whether the student requires assistive technology devices and services.

• The IEP team must review a student's IEP periodically, but not less than annually, and more often if the parents or school ask for a review.

• At least every three years, the IEP team must review existing data and conduct appropriate assessments to determine if continued services are necessary.

• IEPs must include a statement of transition planning for students starting at age 14 or younger, if determined appropriate by the IEP team. Transition
planning focuses on the courses of study the student needs to reach his or her post-school goals. Beginning at least by age 16, transition services help the
student move from school to adult life, which can involve higher education, job training, or employment.

Myth:

The IEP can only include supports for the student, not supports for personnel who work with the student.

Reality:

Supports for school personnel to assist the student can now be written into the IEP.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Return to Top
Questions

"Does a school district have to evaluate a child for a specific learning disability, i.e. dyslexia? (California)

"The school refuses to provide any services when a student makes passing grades." (Oklahoma)

"I was told that a specific standard score on an academic portion of the Woodcock Johnson indicates that my child does not qualify for special education services." (Tennessee)

"My child receives tutoring in reading (at my expense). The tutor thinks he has dyslexia. When I asked the school to evaluate, they refused. They said his IQ is too high to qualify for special ed. Is this true?" (New Jersey)

In determining a child's current level of educational achievement for purposes of specific learning disability (SLD) identification, can satisfactory grades be
discounted if the child receives them due to extraordinary parental or tutoring assistance received outside the school day or compensatory help received at
school?

May a child who has an exceptionally high I.Q. and is achieving at age level, but not ability level, be eligible for special education as specific learning disabled (SLD)?

Must an evaluation to determine if a child has a specific learning disability (SLD)include testing in all seven areas listed in 34 CFR 300.541(a)(2)?

ANSWERS:

Digest of Response from Office of Special Education Programs

In determining a child's current level of educational achievement for purposes of specific learning disability (SLD) identification, it would generally be appropriate to consider information about outside or extra learning support provided to the child when determining whether a child who receives satisfactory grades is nevertheless not achieving at age-level. Such information may indicate that a child's current educational achievement reflects the service augmentation, not what the child's achievement would be without such help.

Children With High I.Q.'s Not Excluded From SLD Disability Category

There is no categorical exclusion for children with high IQs in Part B; therefore, if a student with a high I.Q. is not achieving at his expected performance standard for reasons other than those specified in 34 CFR 300.541(b), (the criteria for determining the existence of a specific learning disability (SLD)), and
otherwise meets the criteria for that disability in accordance with that provision, the child can properly be identified within the meaning of that disability. Each
child who is evaluated for a suspected learning disability must be measured against his own expected performance, and not against some arbitrary general
standard.

SLD Evaluation Must Include Testing of All Seven Areas Listed in 34 CFR 300.541(a)(2)

None of the seven areas listed in 34 CFR 300.541(a)(2)(i)-(vii), the Part B regulation which establishes the criteria for determining the existence of a specific learning disability (SLD), can be categorically excluded from a multidisciplinary team's evaluation to determine whether a child has a SLD. To the contrary, each of these areas must be taken into consideration, and a state policy which requires otherwise may be suspect.

Clarification of what should be taken into consideration by the Multidisciplinary Team when applying Section 300.541; "a multidisciplinary team may determine that a child has a specific learning disability if the child does not achieve commensurate with his or her age and ability levels in one or more of the
following areas:

(i) Oral expression;
(ii) Listening comprehension;
(iii) Written expression;
(iv) Basic reading skill;
(v) Reading comprehension;
(vi) Mathematics calculation; or
(vii) Mathematics reasoning."

One of the significant problems has to do with STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES WHO ARE BEING DENIED SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES
BECAUSE THEY ARE RECEIVING As, Bs AND Cs ON THEIR REPORT CARDS AND ARE PASSING FROM GRADE TO GRADE AT THE SAME RATEAS THEIR PEERS.

Some parents are even being told that a standard score of 85 or higher on an academic portion of the Woodcock Johnson indicates that the child is achieving at grade level in that subject and therefore, does not need special education services.

Some teachers state that some Multidisciplinary Teams are being told that they now must consider as a part of eligibility criteria, whether the students' disability adversely impacts their ability to benefit from regular education (as stated in the Davilla letter; see below). The term "adversely impacts" is given a very restrictive definition by the school systems.

School systems seem to be basing their eligibility policies for students with learning disabilities on the following factors:

1. The standard established by the Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Rowley that a handicapped child is not entitled to a special education (IEP) that
is designed to permit him to reach his maximum or optimum potential and "that the LEA is not required to provide the best education, only an 'appropriate one,' even though the North Carolina State statute says; "The policy of the State is to insure every child a free and full opportunity to reach his full potential."

2. A 1989 letter of finding written by Robert R. Davila, former Assistant Secretary of Education commenting on Section 300.541(a) of the Federal regulations in which Mr. Davila stated "In the second situation the students would not satisfy the Federal requirement that there be a failure to achieve commensurate with [their] age. . ., although there was a failure to achieve commensurate with their ability levels." Mr. Davila's choice of words gives the impression that a Federal requirement of failure is written into the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Unfortunately, Mr. Davila's rendering of the law is causing loss of services for many students with learning disabilities who are in need of special education services in order to receive benefit from education.

Another statement in Mr. Davilla's letter that raises an issue for IEP Teams when they are making eligibility decisions for students with learning disabilities is "IN THE CASE WHERE A STUDENT'S DISABILITY DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE STUDENT'S ABILITY TO BENEFIT FROM PARTICIPATION IN THE REGULAR EDUCATION PROGRAM WITHOUT SUPPLEMENTARY AIDS AND SERVICES, AND THE STUDENT IS PROGRESSING FROM GRADE  TO GRADE AT THE SAME RATE AS HIS OR HER AGE PEERS, THEN THAT STUDENT IS NOT ENTITLED UNDER THE ACT TO SPECIAL EDUCATION"

Many students identified as having learning disabilities are not failing to achieve commensurate with their age level and are passing from grade to grade at the same rate their peer. Yet these same students are still in need of special education and related services in order to benefit from education. This is true for students with above average intelligence as well as students with average intelligence.

The reason these students are achieving and passing is because parents are spending countless hours helping their children with homework, reviewing
material and studying for tests. Parents also spend a great deal of money year after year on tutors thereby providing services themselves. Another factor in the academic success of these students is that many of their teachers do an outstanding job of individualizing instruction and modifying curriculum and tests.

These children are not failing because they are not being allowed to fail. Parents and teachers are giving this type of support because they understand the
devastation that comes with failure.

Thus, we contend that these two factors need to be addressed when eligibility decisions are made:

1. How much help is the student receiving outside of the school day?
2. Does the student need remedial help in the areas of reading, writing and arithmetic?

Modifications/compensatory by-pass strategies are vitally important to the academic success of most students with learning disabilities, however, in some
cases modifications can also mask severe academic weaknesses which might possibly respond to individualized instruction. For example:

A 6th grade student receives As and Bs on her report card. She has a learning disability in written language, dictates most written work to a parent, takes all
tests orally and reads all class work to the teacher because the teacher can't understand what the student has written. Direct services in the area of written language is not considered because the student receives As and Bs on her report card and in fact she loses her eligibility for special education services,
even though she has over the 15 point discrepancy, because she is achieving commensurate with the age and ability levels of her peers.

An 8th grade student receives As, Bs and some Cs on his report card. He has an identified learning disability in reading yet he has never received a comprehensive diagnostic evaluation in reading and has not received direct
reading instruction since 5th grade. He struggles to read his text books in school and his parents help him to read school books in the evening including all math instructions and math word problems. Upon reevaluation this student also loses eligibility for services because he did not have the 15 point
discrepancy required by North Carolina. He was, however, only tested in the areas of broad reading and broad math. His mother is told that because he is achieving above grade level, the school system will not do the alternative method of documenting a discrepancy. The possibility that he might benefit from direct reading instruction is not taken into consideration.

Two court decisions; Ohio (Toledo Public School District 1989) and February 10, 1992), supported parents whose children were achieving academically to the point that the school systems thought the students should not receive special education services. One student was academically gifted/learning disabled and was achieving at or above grade level; the other had a low IQ and was achieving at or above potential. Both courts gave a great deal of credit for the students' achievement levels, to daily help from parents, teachers and private tutors.

According to these courts, achieving at or above grade/age level or achievement level does not disqualify a student from eligibility for special education services.

(3) Clarification of the responsibilities granted to the Administrative Placement Committee (APC) according to Federal Law and definition of what is meant by
the word 'PLACEMENT' in regard to their job description.

Does the term 'placement decisions' mean eligibility decisions (whether or not the student is going to be placed in a special education program); or in which
part of the continuum of placements the student will receive special education; or allocation of resources?

Is the APC Committee given the authority to override eligibility decisions made by the Multidisciplinary Committee at the local school level?

This Committee, including a Local Education Agency Representative, signs all state and federal paperwork and then together with the parent writes and signs the IEP. The signed Special Education Forms and the IEP then goes to the Administrative Placement Committee (APC) located in each Local Educational Agency's Central Administration Office. According to NC. Special Education Policies and Procedures Manual, the APC Committee is empowered to make final decisions on eligibility.

In some cases their parents have been informed that their children are not eligible after the IEP Team met with the parents, the parents were told that the
child received the necessary 15 point discrepancy(2004 IDEA addresses this issue), every person on the IEP Team including the LEA Representative signed all of the necessary paper work which stated that the child had a learning disability that was not correctable without special education services and every person on the IEP Team, including the parents agreed upon the contents of the IEP and signed it. The special education forms and IEP were then sent to the Administrative Placement Committee (APC) where special education services for that student were denied because the APC Team overrode the eligibility decision made by the IEP Team.

Unfortunately, these are not isolated incidences.

Eligibility of Children with High IQs

Multi-Disciplinary Evaluations

"Each child who is evaluated for a suspected learning disability must be measured against his or her own expected performance, and not against some arbitrary general standard." The Part B regulations include requirements, at 34 CFR §§ 300.540-300.543, which must be used for evaluating children suspected of having specific learning disabilities, in addition to the evaluation requirements at 34 CFR §§ 300.530-300.534. The multidisciplinary evaluation team, whose responsibilities for evaluating a child with a specific learning disability are specified at 34 CFR §§ 300.541-300.543, is responsible for making a determination as to whether there is a severe discrepancy between an individual child's ability and his or her performance level.

Underachievement is measured against the student's own ability, and not against a normative performance standard. Thus, each child's educational
needs are determined on a case-by-case basis, using the evaluation procedures at 34 CFR §§ 300.530-300.534, and the additional criteria at 34 CFR §§ 300.540-300.543 when evaluating children with learning disabilities.

"Teachers [are] saying that some Multidisciplinary Teams are being told that they now must consider as a part of eligibility criteria, whether the student's
disability adversely impacts their ability to benefit from regular education." Part B contains no such requirement. In order to be eligible for services under Part B, a child must be evaluated as having one or more of thirteen specified physical, mental, emotional, or sensory impairments, which cause the child to
need special education and related services. 20 U.S.C. § 1401(a)(1). The common denominator in this definition is that the child's impairment "adverselyaffects educational performance." 34 CFR § 300.7(b)(1)-(b)(13). Part B does not otherwise define this concept. The term "adversely affects" is used in the Part B regulations at 34 CFR § 300.7 in the phrase "adversely affects a child's educational performance." An operational definition of "educational performance" ..... a child's educational performance must be determined on an individual basis, and should include non-academic and academic skills. Since the measurement of "educational performance" is different for each child, the Department has not developed a single definition for this term. Similarly, the term "adversely affects" must be determined on an individual basis.

. . .Neither Part B nor the Part B regulations provide for any exclusions based on intelligence level in determining eligibility for Part B services. The regulations, at 34 CFR § 300.541(b), do provide that:

[t]he team may not identify a child as having a specific learning disability if the severe discrepancy between ability and achievement is primarily the result of---(1) A visual, hearing, or motor [disability]; (2) Mental retardation; (3) Emotional disturbance; or (4) Environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

No mention is made in the regulations of any exclusions solely on the basis of intelligence. All children, except those specifically excluded in the regulations,
regardless of I.Q., are eligible to be considered as having a specific learning disability, if they meet the eligibility requirements contained in the Part B
regulations.

Some students are being disqualified for services under Part B because they are passing from grade to grade, without taking into consideration any severe
discrepancy between the child's ability and the child's performance. In some instances, a child's final grade in mathematics or reading, or a score on an
achievement test, alone, is used to determine whether a child is eligible for services under Part B.

In order for a child to be eligible for services under Part B under the specific learning disability category, there must be a severe discrepancy between the
child's achievement and intellectual ability in one or more of the following areas: oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading
skill, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, or mathematics reasoning. 34 CFR § 300.541(a)(2)(i)-(vii). None of the areas listed at § 300.541(a)(2)(i)-(vii) can be categorically excluded from the areas that the multidisciplinary team examines to determine whether a child has a specific learning disability.

A child may be considered to have a specific learning disability if the multidisciplinary evaluation team finds that the child "does not achieve commensurate with his or her age and ability levels" in one or more of the areas, and the child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual
ability in these areas that is not the result of other known handicapping conditions or environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage. See 34 CFR § 300.541(a)(1)-(2) and (b). Of course, as is the case for all other children who are identified as having a disability, a child is not eligible for services under Part B unless, because of their disability, they need special education and related services. See 34 CFR § 300.7(a).

Tutoring

You also asked if the evaluation team should consider any tutoring that the child receives outside of the school day, or any modifications or compensatory
strategies that are used with the child, and that the child needs in order to succeed academically, when determining whether the child is eligible for services under Part B.

Although this specific issue is not addressed in the Part B regulations, a team may find that a child has a specific learning disability if the team determines that "[t]he child does not achieve commensurate with his or her age and ability levels in one or more of the areas listed in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, when provided with learning experiences appropriate for the child's age and ability levels. . .." 34 CFR § 300.541(a)(1).

Generally, it would be appropriate for the evaluation team to consider information about outside or extra learning support provided to the child in developing the written report required at 34 CFR § 300.543, as such information may indicate that the child's current educational achievement reflects the service augmentation, not what the child's achievement would be without such help. Such information may also have bearing on the evaluation team's conclusion, required by 34 CFR § 300.543(b)(6), on whether the child has "a severe discrepancy between achievement and ability that is not correctable
without special education and related services."

Eligibility & Placement Decisions

Which groups appropriately make eligibility and placement decisions? Before a child can receive services under Part B, the responsible public agency must
evaluate the child in accordance with the requirements of 34 CFR §§ 300.531-300.532, and in the case of children suspected of having a learning disability, the requirements of 34 CFR §§ 300.540-300.543. Under Section 300.532, the evaluation must be made by a multidisciplinary team or group of persons, including at least one teacher or other specialist with knowledge in the area of suspected disability. See 34 CFR § 300.532(e). For children suspected of having learning disabilities the additional team member specified at § 300.540 must also be included in the multidisciplinary team. The evaluation must assess the child "in all areas related to the suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance, communicative status, and motor abilities." See 34 CFR 300.532(f)). After the evaluation is completed, the determination is made about whether or not the child is eligible for services under Part B.

Under Part B, placement decisions must be made "by a group of persons, including persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation
data, and the placement options." See 34 CFR § 300.533(a)(3). The term "placement" as used in this provision encompasses eligibility (e.g., placement
into special education), placement in a continuum option, and location in which services will be delivered. While the regulation requires that each of these decisions be made in accordance with 34 CFR § 300.533, it does not require that all of those decisions be made at the same time, or even by the same group of persons.

If the child is eligible for services under Part B, the school district must conduct a meeting to develop an individualized education program (IEP) for the child,
within thirty days of the date of the eligibility determination. See 34 CFR § 300.343(c). Although the Part B regulations clearly contemplate that IEP meetings are held after eligibility decisions are made, they do not necessarily preclude the development of IEPs in anticipation of eligibility determinations.

One of the determinations made by the participants at the IEP meeting is the specially-designed instruction or special education services, as well as any
necessary related services, to be included in the IEP. Since the IEP forms the basis for decisions about where the child will receive services (34 CFR 300.552(a)(2)), the decision about where the IEP will be implemented generally would be made after the IEP meeting has taken place.

Tests that can be used to evaluate the areas listed at 34 CFR § 300.541(a)(i)-(vii). The Part B regulations set out requirements for evaluating children with
disabilities at 34 CFR §§ 300.530-300.534, with additional criteria for evaluating children with specific learning disabilities at 34 CFR §§ 300.540-300.543. Neither the Act nor the Part B regulations prescribe specific tests which must be used to meet the Federal requirements. The regulation at 34 CFR § 300.532 requires State and local educational agencies to ensure that tests and other evaluation materials:

"(1) Are provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication, unless clearly not feasible to do so;
(2) Have been validated for the specific purpose for which they are used; and
(3) Are administered by trained personnel in conformance with the instructions provided by their producer."No single test or procedure may be used as the sole criterion for determining the appropriate educational program for a child.

These regulations require that, within 60 calendar days of receiving the complaint, must provide you with a written decision that addresses each allegation in the complaint, and contains (1) findings of fact and conclusions, and (2) the reasons for the final decision.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Return to Top
Achieving Educational Success
by Jonathan Mooney

In my school life, I've been every kind of student. As a little kid, I was in love with learning. I would spend hours building things with my hands or talking about ideas or stories that got me excited. Come elementary school, I became the kind of student who was considered "bad" and "stupid." I grew up in the hallway hanging out with the janitors after being kicked out of class or sitting in a little blue desk in the principal's office chatting with Shirley the receptionist. I grew up in the "blue bird" reading group reading "See Spot run." I spent elementary school hiding in the bathroom in tears, terrified of reading out loud and praying that when I returned I would be passed by in the reading circle -- only to discover that the class had waited for me.

I learned at an early age there is a stark difference between education and schooling. Although many schools give lip service to the ideas of truly valuing knowledge, passion, and the individual learner, what our education system truly values is schooling: sitting still, getting in line, blind achievement, competition, and following the rules. Come high school, I was sick of schooling. I was the kind of student who did not care one iota about school. I was an athlete and that was all. Or at least that was all I showed to the outside world. Like most students who have learned academic helplessness, under that facade was a kid who loved to learn his own way. But it was a long time before I found that kid again, the one who loved to learn. I slipped through high school considered apathetic, lazy, and average; I was even told that I would be "flipping burgers for a living."

So what kind of student am I today? Am I flipping burgers? Not quite. Even though I still spell at a third-grade level and have the attention span of a gnat, I graduated from Brown University with a 4.0 in English literature. I was a finalist for a Rhodes scholarship and was awarded the Truman Scholarship for Public Service for Graduate Studies in the field of creative writing and education. In addition, as an undergraduate, I co-authored a book, Learning Outside the Lines. I am far from flipping burgers.

But Brown, my GPA, and these accolades are not the essence of my success. School success is far from educational success. The essence of my success is that I stopped pursuing schooling and pursued my education. How did I do this? My approach to learning -- my study skills -- played a pivotal role in that transition. During my time at Brown I abandoned the notion of trying to learn the normal way, I stopped worrying about schooling, and developed an approach to learning and studying that was truly individualized. This approach is what you will find here. These principles about study skills will get you started.

Principle 1: Learner Centered Tools for Empowerment

These study skills are about empowerment. They are tools that can empower your kids to craft an individualized education that is right for them in an
environment where students have little control and little room for individuality. These study skills are centered around your child's individual learning style, personal goals, and educational passions. You will have help to identify how your child learns, and then find concrete tools to empower you to individualize your child's approach to school. They are not one-size fits all and they do not oppose some idealized standard of what a good student should be like.

Principle 2: Play the School Game

My mom saved my life by telling me that my struggles with school were not because my mind was broken, and we would learn how to play the school game and navigate this system together. That is the foundation of any successful study skills development. Your child's success or struggles with school are not an indication of her intelligence or her worth. The reality is that school is a game, with rules and ways to learn how to play the game better. There is freedom and concrete success in addressing this fact with your child and helping her understand that study skills are a way to play the school game in a manner that is right for her mind.

Principle 3: Develops Meta-Cognitive Skills

One of the most important elements of these study skills is that they begin the process of developing meta-cognitive skills in your child. The meta-cognitive process is just a fancy way to say helping your child to think about thinking -- in other words helping your child understand how she learns and how she thinks. Many studies have shown that meta-cognitive skills are a better prediction of life success than grades or test scores. This is no surprise. When an adult knows how his mind works he can master any situation in his life. As you work with your child to develop individualized study skills, ask her to think about how her mind works.

Principle 4: Recursive Process

It is important to realize that the act of developing individualized study skills is a recursive process that keeps building on itself over time. It is unreasonable to expect that your child will develop perfect study skills in one day. In reality, developing study skills is a process of trial and error that occurs over the course of a child's school life. It is imperative that you create an environment where it is OK for your child to try a skill, fail at that skill, evaluate why that skill did not work, and create another one. Moreover, study skills change with different academic tasks and as your child gets older. These study skills are something you will come back to over and over again. Through this recursive process of trial and error, you will empower your child to have ownership of her own study habits and be able to adapt and modify these skills herself.

Principle 5: Study Skills as the Practice of Educational Freedom

In the end, there is an element of these study skills that transacts the concrete goal of your child getting better grades. These study skills are about killing the myth that there is such a thing as a "normal" student. The reality is that what we consider to be normal is actually average -- normal students are those that are well schooled, not well educated. Your goal is to have an educated child. These study skills provide a platform for you to begin the process of un-schooling your child. Ultimately, these study skills are an educational end in and of themselves. The process of empowering your child to develop dynamic study skills and take control of her education is an exercise in the practice of educational freedom.

So much creativity, talent, passion, and so many lives are lost because we value "schooling," fitting in, and being normal above true learning. It is educational freedom, not school success, not schooling, not gold stars, or GPA's, that will change your child's life.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Special Ed Advocacy: Nine Rules of Thumb
Return to Top
K. Crabtree                                                                           

Because the stakes are so high, it is very difficult for parents of children with special educational needs to advocate calmly and objectively for the educational and related services their children need. Nevertheless, calmness, objectivity, and a third quality -- patience for the long haul -- are the parents' most important tools in a complex and often frustrating process. In the course of that process, here are a few rules of thumb I have found to be helpful to parents.

Rule one: Build a reliable team around your child

The first step in building a reliable team is to find independent evaluators who can help you understand and advocate for your child. Other members of your support team may include a trained educational advocate who can help you understand the procedural steps and think through strategies as well as attend meetings and help you make your case. (As a general rule, an expert evaluator should not also be your advocate; the skills are different, and an evaluator is more credible if allowed simply to comment as an expert in your child's needs.)

Be sure to find an advocate who has the experience and judgment to help you work cooperatively and effectively with your school system rather than to enter with all guns blazing right from the start. It also is helpful to connect with parents of other children with similar disabilities in and out of your school
district -- groups from whom you can receive both emotional and informational support as you advocate.

Rule two: Learn the rules

In every state there are written rules and regulations that describe both the substance of a student's rights to educational and related services and the
procedures one must use to obtain those services. Read them! Usually they can be obtained from the local school system, the state's department of education, an advocacy group, or a local library. (In addition to regular libraries, there are usually libraries located in courthouses that should have copies of state regulations and laws.) A well-thumbed copy of the special education regulations is a useful tool to have at your side when you attend a TEAM meeting. It signals to school representatives that you're serious and know the ropes.

For children who are too young to be eligible for special education services, parents should look into early intervention programs. Again, there are written rules and regulations with which parents should become familiar. Although appeals procedures in the early intervention system are typically looser than in the special education system, knowing the standards and the available steps is critical to effective advocacy.

Rule three: Don't over-rely on the rules

Special education regulations contain many detailed requirements: deadlines, notification requirements, rules about who should attend TEAM meetings, who should evaluate students, and so forth. A strong advocate knows these requirements, but also avoids elevating form over substance. Compliance with the letter of the law is far less important in the long run than serving the educational needs of the child. Typically, Hearing Officers are more interested in the content of an IEP and whether a proposed placement can deliver appropriate services than in punishing school systems for procedural violations that don't seriously affect the quality of the child's program. Bottom line: Be ready to give the school system reasonable leeway on procedural matters while pressing firmly and steadily for quality programs and services.

Caution: while being reasonable about postponements and the like, do make sure that meetings, evaluations and other steps occur early enough in the
school year (preferably in the spring of the year before the school year in question) to move the process along toward an acceptable IEP or a hearing to
resolve disputes.

Rule four: Prioritize your issues

In any student's life some needs and issues demand more attention than others. Sensible advocacy includes understanding the order of importance of each of your child's needs and which services or elements of a program can be de-emphasized to achieve the greater goal. If you want the school system to pay for an outside placement, are you willing to provide transportation or pay for some additional service not available at the outside placement to settle the conflict? Of course, the answer to these questions depends on the strength of your case, how urgent the needs are, your financial circumstances, and other factors. However, understanding the priorities and being willing to give up something often helps resolve a case and helps preserve the relationship between school system and family.

Rule five: Share all information

Parents (and some evaluators) sometimes feel that they should not provide independent evaluations or other information they have obtained at their own expense to school systems. This is usually a mistake. The most common reasons parents give for withholding information:

They think that they'll be in a better position to argue for an alternative program if the school system doesn't do a competent job -- a more likely outcome if the school system is not given guidance by the parents' experts.

They think the information will reduce their chances of achieving the goal they seek, because it contains different recommendations from what the parents want, or because it contains information that the school system could use to avoid providing services. As a rule, I recommend that parents share all information as soon as it is available. If a dispute with your school system goes into litigation, the school system will most likely obtain copies of any written information that you withheld earlier through a formal "discovery" process. If a document that was withheld earlier contains information that might have helped the school system write a better IEP, the Hearing Officer will likely rule that the school system be given a chance to alter its program to address the new information. If the document contains information harmful to the parents' position in the case, the damage will be greater because the information was not shared in the normal course. Attempts to put the damaging information into a less harmful context will ring false at this late date.

Sometimes a document contains private family information that the parents don't want to share with school personnel. If the information is not relevant to
the child's educational and related needs, perhaps the writer of the document can be persuaded to revise the document removing the information. Otherwise, you have to balance the risks involved in not sharing information with the harm or embarrassment that may be caused in sharing the information. If you decide to give the information, it is a good idea to use a cover letter emphasizing the confidentiality of the document and asking that the information be used only as strictly necessary in the planning and delivery of services to the child.

Rule six: Document everything and keep all documents.

You should document every important communication or event. This means:

Follow up an important conversation or meeting with a letter saying, for example: "Thank you for talking/meeting with me today about my
son/daughter's needs. I understand you have agreed to [whatever] by [date]. Please let me know right away if my understanding is not accurate."

Keep a log (a spiral notebook works well) of all telephone and face-to-face conversations and other key events that say something about your child's
needs or service/program options or demonstrate something about the school's response to those needs.

Take excellent notes at any key meeting, particularly at TEAM meetings. It is best to have someone with you whose only job is to do this so that neither you nor anyone who needs to play an active role at the meeting will be distracted by having to take notes. Meetings can be tape-recorded, but with the difficulty of transcribing tapes, notes are usually the best record.

Be sure that you have everything the school system has. Periodically examine your child's student records kept by the school system and obtain copies of any documents you don't already have.

Keep all documents in chronological order. Don't write notes on them, since they may be used as exhibits at a due process hearing someday. Use stick-on notes if you want to highlight something. Rule seven: Understand least restrictive environment

Special education law requires that services be delivered in the least restrictive appropriate environment, meaning generally the setting which is closest to the regular education program in which your child can progress effectively with or without added supports and resources. Most often this means that you have to exhaust the reasonable possibilities for programs and services within the local community before you have a reasonable chance to argue for any other alternative. However, if you have very strong advice based on an expert's personal knowledge of the school system's program that it would be ineffective or worse, you can sometimes risk not trying the program before proceeding to litigation.

Rule eight: Don't confuse personality conflicts with real issues

A dispute between parents and school system employees over what services a child needs can bring out the worst in people. However, a parent cannot afford to be distracted by the bad manners of a teacher or administrator, nor to allow his or her own anger to erupt into rudeness. Remember that the real issue in any case is whether the actual services in the classroom are sufficient to enable a child to progress educationally and whether the service providers are qualified to deliver those services, not whether the school representatives treat you with civility. It often helps to put yourself mentally into the shoes of the administrator and/or teacher and understand their agendas. For example, a special education administrator must respond not just to children's needs and to parents, but also to the demands of superintendents, school committees and teachers and other service providers. A regular education teacher, who entered her profession with energy, creativity, and love for children, may have been burned out by years of teaching increasingly larger classes, including children with complex special needs, without adequate support or training.

Rule nine: Consider how each step would look to an impartial decision-maker

Consider how each action you or your school system takes will look if someday that action is described to a hearing officer charged with deciding about your child's special educational plan. This precept underlies all the others: You want a hearing officer to see that you have shared information, treated school personnel with courtesy, selected credible experts, tried any reasonable options the school system offered, and are using the due process system to seek truly important services rather than to fight over minor concerns or procedural violations that do not seriously affect the quality of your child's program.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Return to Top
Parents' Guide to College Planning for Gifted Kids
Sandra Berger, M.Ed.

Gifted Kids Need More Time, Not Less

I always thought that college planning would be easier for gifted students -- until my own gifted children started the process. I found out that, contrary to myths, planning for college is actually more difficult for the gifted:

Many gifted kids are good at everything and interested in everything. With more than 3,500 colleges and an infinite number of college majors, decision-making may seem overwhelming.

Most gifted kids are very sensitive to family expectations. When children grow up hearing stories about a particular college, they may pick up the underlying message that they'll simply go to that same school and don't need to plan alternatives.

Believing that there is lots of time while they're young, many gifted kids avoid the topic for as long as possible. The decisions made in last-minute planning are not likely to be based on self-exploration.

Every student needs an optimal match between his needs and a college's offerings. Your gifted student -- who's good at and likes everything -- needs
more time to plan this match, not less. Beyond the SAT and before the acceptance letter, college planning means learning about strengths, discovering talents and interests, exploring careers, understanding what colleges offer, and deciding how to match this unique mix with a college experience.

Middle School, and Starting High School Seventh and Eighth Grades

This is the time to explore new activities. Your child should look for summer programs or clubs that will allow her to explore her interests and try out new
activities. If the program costs too much, find out if scholarships are available. Some state advocacy groups offer scholarships for summer programs. Gifted seventh- and eighth- graders need time to learn about themselves, their strengths, and their favorite subjects and activities.

This is also a crucial time to acquire good study and time-management skills. While some courses from these early years will appear on the high-school
transcript, the grades earned now will be far less important to colleges than the grades earned by junior year.

Traps to Avoid for High School Entering high school, your college-bound teen might be tempted to:

Focus on getting into college instead of on having the experiences she'll need to succeed once she's there. During high school, students are in the process of "becoming." Trying a variety of experiences and identifying interests and strengths is an important part of becoming an adult.

Join extracurricular activities only to impress colleges instead of participating in activities that will help him grow as a person. It's true that colleges look at extracurricular activities. However, they really want to know who the applicant is, what activities he enjoys, and how he'll contribute to campus life.

Avoid rigorous courses because she might not get an A. Colleges need to know if students can succeed in college-level work. They would rather see a lower grade in a rigorous course like calculus than an A in a course like consumer math.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Return to Top

How to Be Your Child's Champion

Brought to you by the Council for Exceptional Children

As a parent of a child with disabilities or special gifts, you may find yourself thrown into the role of "advocate." At times, you may be working for changes in federal or state law. But more often than not, you will be talking with your child's teacher or TEAM about placement, a teaching strategy, or your child's difficulties in the classroom.

To help you become a successful advocate, Trina Osher, director of the Family Leadership Initiative and member of the CEC, shares these tips.

Get all the information

The first step to successful advocacy is to gather information. Learn what is happening in the school; get copies of school records, tests, and evaluations affecting your child; and talk with your child's teacher to learn what she views as the areas of concern.

You should also learn about special education law and its protections. You can get this information from the school's special education or guidance director, state departments of education, or parent information and training centers, as well as organizations such as CEC. The law can be complex and difficult to understand, so consider working with a parent advocate, who can explain the law, as well as special education procedures.

Last but not least, talk with your child to learn how she views the situation and what she thinks will help. Even young children have a keen sense of their stress points and what could be done to make it easier for them to succeed.

Be specific

As your child's advocate, you need to be clear about what you want the school to do. Be prepared to explain what you are happy and unhappy with, what you want changed, and how you want it changed. For example, if your child is having difficulty completing homework, you should say whether you would like the assignment to be changed or for it to be provided on audio tape.

To learn about the different options available, you could talk with other parents who have children with similar problems. Ask the school for contact names.

Speak honestly and positively

Communicating well with your child's teacher and other school personnel is essential to your advocacy efforts. Keep in mind that the school's interest is the
same as yours -- you both want the best for your child. In your dealings with the school, be honest and develop a positive relationship with the teacher and other staff. Start where the concern is, usually with the classroom teacher. Only move up the chain of command if you must.

It's hard to be diplomatic when you are concerned about your child's welfare -- you want to get feisty. But, get feisty only if that's what it takes.

Bring a companion to meetings

Bring a companion, friend, or advocate with you to school meetings. This person can help you listen, take notes so you are free to concentrate on the
discussion, and help you understand what happened afterwards. In addition, your companion can help slow you down if things get too emotional.

Don't be afraid to say No, or Not Yet

Don't be pressured into making a bad decision. You can always say no, request more information, or ask for more time to consider a proposed solution. Take the time to consult with experts and people you trust in the community, then get back to the school with your decision.

Remember due process

If your child has a disability, you can use due process to resolve disputes with the school, but it should be a last resort. Often, due process proceedings turn
the school and parents into adversaries. It is much more beneficial to maintain a positive relationship with those who work with your child.

Strengthen your voice with others

One of the best ways to strengthen your voice is to band together with other parents facing similar situations. To find other parents who share your concern, try this: Give the school a sheet of labels printed with your name, address, and phone along with a note stating that you would like to meet other parents facing a similar issue. The teachers and principal might not be able to give you other parents' names, but they can talk to interested parents who will be able to take your name and number with them.

When you meet with other parents, share your experiences. As a group, develop some proposals to solve the problem. The parents should then meet with the appropriate school staff. For example, a group of parents who wanted to get computers in the resource room would meet first with the resource room teacher. This approach allows the parents to build a strong partnership with the teachers. Then teachers and parents can build an alliance, which can be particularly effective in creating change.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Return to Top
Special Ed Advocacy: Mistakes People Make
by Robert K. Crabtree

Parents

Here are several common errors which can undermine parents' ability to obtain appropriate services:

(1) Viewing the special education process as the moral equivalent of war, fighting that war with a "scorched earth" approach, and letting personal
animosity toward administrators and/or teachers distort one's judgment about what is best for the child and what is realistic to accept;

(2) The opposite mistake: trusting administrators and teachers too uncritically; assuming that if they are "nice" they are also competent and interested in
serving the child's best interest; not questioning slow, or nonexistent progress as long as the child, parent and teacher have a cordial relationship;

(3) Taking an "all or nothing" approach: waiting too long before getting good independent advice, then insisting on instant delivery of needed services rather than steady progress toward the right program;

(4) Failing to understand that the special education process sometimes requires that the parent educate the child's special education team about the child's disabilities and needs (the school system may not be willfully refusing to meet the child's needs; they may simply not understand those needs);

(5) Not trying a program or added services, even on a temporary basis, when they are offered by the school system -- holding out for an alternative program only to have a hearing officer decide the untried program might have worked;

(6) Attempting to "micro-manage" the details of a child's life in school; even if parents don't feel things are going well, their efforts to control the child's day usually backfire when the hearing officer concludes that the parents were over-protective and didn't let the school professionals do their job;

(7) Focusing on minor, non-prejudicial procedural missteps by the school (e.g., the parent who already knows her rights who says, "Aha! Gotcha! School district forgot to give me the rights brochure!") instead of focusing on the substantial issues in the case;

(8) Not consenting to school evaluations;

(9) Choosing the wrong independent evaluators: e.g., "hired guns" who only say what the parents want them to say, and have a reputation for doing so;
those who will not follow through by observing programs, attending team meetings, etc.; those who do not have training or experience to evaluate a child like yours;

(10) Not providing copies of independent evaluations to the school, or not providing them in a timely way;

(11) Not responding in a timely way to proposed IEPs;

(12) Not documenting issues with the school; not sending letters to confirm agreements with the school or to record important conversations with school
personnel.

(13) Seeing the school system as a monolith ("All those teachers are incompetent [or wonderful!]"); failing to look carefully at alternatives within the system for this year and at next year's teacher possibilities.


Robert K. Crabtree is a partner at Kotin, Crabtree, and Strong, LLP, a general practice law firm in Boston, Massachusetts. Among other areas of practice, Mr. Crabtree concentrates in special education and disability law.
Return to Top
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
What to Include in an IEP

Brought to you by the Council for Exceptional Children

The Elements

The IEP (Individualized Education Program) must include the following elements:

1. A statement of your child's present levels of educational performance, including the ways in which his disability affects his involvement and progress
in the general education curriculum. For preschool children, you would consider whether the disability affects the child's participation in any activities
that would be appropriate for him.

2. A statement of measurable annual goals for your child, including benchmarks or short-term objectives. These must help her to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum, as well as meet other educational needs that result from her disability.

3. A statement of the special education, related services, and supplementary aids and services to be provided to your child. This would include program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided for your child:


To advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals,

To be involved and progress in the general curriculum and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities, and

To be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled kids in all of this.

4. An explanation of the extent, if any, to which your child will not participate with nondisabled children in the general education class and in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities.

5. A description of any modifications in state- or district-wide assessments of student achievement that are needed in order for your child to participate. If the team determines that he will not participate in such an assessment (or part of an assessment), a statement of why that assessment is not appropriate for him and how he will be assessed.

6. The projected date for the beginning of the services and modifications, as well as their frequency, location, and duration.

7. Beginning at age 14, and updated annually, a statement of the transition service needs, and beginning at age 16 (or younger, if appropriate), a statement of needed transition services.

8. A statement of how your child's progress toward her annual goals will be measured and a description of how you will be regularly informed of her
progress toward the annual goals and the extent to which that progress is sufficient to enable her to achieve the goals by the end of the year.
 

Other Factors

In developing your child's IEP, the team must consider his strengths, your concerns for enhancing the education of your child, and the results of his initial evaluation. The team must also consider certain special factors, if applicable, including:


Strategies, including positive behavioral interventions and supports, for your child if her behavior impedes her own or other children's learning.
The language needs of your child, if he has limited English proficiency, as these needs relate to his IEP. Instruction in Braille and the use of Braille for your child, if she is blind or visually impaired, unless the IEP team determines that such instruction is not appropriate for her. Your child's communication needs, particularly if he is deaf or hard of hearing. The need for assistive technology devices and services.

The IEP team is not required to include information under one component of your child's IEP that is already contained in another section.
Return to Top
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Managing Documents Under IDEA
Robert K. Crabtree

Introduction

If you've got kids with special educational needs, you can be overwhelmed by the paperwork in no time at all. From the beginning of school to the time your child either graduates or "ages out" of entitlement to special ed services, the accumulation of IEP's, evaluations, progress reports, correspondence, notes, journals, samples of your child's work, and medical records, will fill several drawers of a file cabinet or take up most of your shelf space.

You might be tempted to throw out papers when they get out of hand, but this may be a mistake. Even the oldest documents in your child's history can
sometimes help you make a case for increased or different services under IDEA.

Make sure you understand the relative importance of different documents and organize them sensibly. Here are some guidelines to help you manage them.

Which Documents Are Keepers?

Here's a list of the different documents that you'll see over the course of your child's special needs education. You should keep them all!

1. Individualized Educational Programs (IEP's) and other official service plans. In addition to IEP's, you may have Individualized Family Service Plans (IFSP). These are service plans that govern early intervention programs for kids before they're old enough to receive special education services, or plans that are written by agencies other than the local school system (such as a department of mental health or mental retardation).

2. Evaluations by the school system and by independent evaluators. Depending on your child, these will include educational, psychological and/or
neuropsychological, speech and language, occupational therapy, and physical therapy evaluations.

3. Medical records. You probably don't need to keep all medical records with your child's IDEA documents. Keep only those that relate to the disability or
disabilities that affect his ability to learn or to access school programs and facilities. As with any other kind of document, when in doubt, keep it!

4. Progress reports and report cards. These are the formal documents where the school system periodically describes how your child is doing.

5. Standardized test results. School systems often administer standardized tests (such as the California Achievement Tests) to all students. These tests can provide a helpful comparison to the progress reports written by your child's teachers.

6. Notes on your child's behavior or progress. These will include notes from you to the teacher, from the teacher to you, or journal entries between you and your child's service providers. Sometimes notes from a concerned teacher tell a different story than the formal report the teacher develops at the request of her supervisor when the TEAM convenes.

7. Correspondence. Save any correspondence between you and teachers, special education administrators, TEAM chairpersons, and evaluators. Don't
forget emails -- print them out and include them in your correspondence file. Also save correspondence from the school system that's addressed to you or to all special education parents describing issues that affect your child. This may include letters describing new programs, changes in programs or services, school system policies for children with special education needs, or budget issues.

Note: Do you use certified mail, return receipt requested, when you send letters or notices to the school system? Sometimes this is necessary, but more often, this just adds unnecessary delay to the delivery of the letter or notice. It's better to hand-deliver the document and ask for a receipt. Remember that in most courts and administrative forums, a letter mailed in ordinary first-class mail is presumed to have been delivered within three days of its mailing.

8. Notes from conversations and meetings with school personnel, evaluators, the child's TEAM, or other interactions relating to your child's program or needs. Be certain to take excellent notes at key meetings or, better yet, bring someone with you whose only task is to take notes (especially at TEAM meetings). These notes can help enormously when, months later, you try to remember exactly what various people said or what agreements were reached.

Note: Should you tape TEAM meetings? Do you have the right to tape them? The answer to both questions is "probably not." Under the laws pertaining to discrimination on the basis of handicap, you may have the right to tape a meeting if it's necessary to accommodate a disability (for example, if one or both parents have a language processing disorder). You may also have the right to tape a meeting if it's conducted in a language other than the parents' first language. Generally, the right to tape a meeting hasn't been determined to exist under IDEA.

Ordinarily, if you ask in advance to tape a TEAM meeting, the school system should let you as a courtesy, and will usually tape the meeting also. You need to consider, however, that having a tape recorder may inhibit the participants and create a feeling of hostility at the meeting. Again, it's usually better if someone takes excellent notes.

9. Documents relating to discipline and/or behavioral concerns. These include notices of detention and suspension (both in and out of school), letters
describing the concerns of service providers or school administrators about behavior, records of behavioral assessments, and records of behavioral plans for addressing behavioral issues.

10. Formal notices of meetings scheduled to discuss your child. When you get a notice like this, jot down the date you received it. Sometimes the question of whether a school system has met time requirements is important under IDEA. (It is sometimes a good idea to keep copies of the envelopes in which such notices arrive. Check the date of the notice or letter and the date of the postmark. It could be significant if the postmark is later than the date on the
notice.)

11. Samples of schoolwork. You don't need to keep every scrap of writing or drawing that your child produces, but it can be helpful to keep examples each year. You can compare these to show how much progress he's made in different academic areas.

12. Invoices and cancelled checks Save the ones from services that you provide for your child's educational development. For example, if you hire a speech and language pathologist for an hour of therapy each week to supplement the school system's services, keep a record of any payment. Eventually, you can seek reimbursement for this expense. (You must be able to prove that it was necessary because the school's services weren't allowing your child to progress effectively.)

13. Public documents. These help explain how your school system works with children like yours. They include newspaper articles featuring special education administrators, school committee members, or superintendents talking about reorganizing special education programs, cutting expenses, or new teaching approaches.

Remember that except in rare cases, you don't need to keep drafts of any documents. The drafts may lead to confusion if you ever need to seek services for your child through the due process system. This is one area where you can and most often should lighten your document load.

Visit the school or special education office every once in a while to look at your child's student records. You want to be sure that you have all the documents the school has. Find out if you have documents that the school doesn't. You can also find out about the rules and regulations in your state for accessing your child's records. In general, all states must provide access under a federal law called the Buckley Amendment.

Typically, you have the right to see the records, wherever they are kept, and to have copies provided to you. You may also have the right to ask that a certain document be removed. If your request is denied, you can appeal the decision.

What Documents Should You Create?


Why is it important to create documents? One reason is that you may have to tell your child's story to another person -- an evaluator, an advocate or lawyer, or a hearing officer -- in order to get help. Documenting events as they occur will help you tell the story accurately. A second reason is that documents can help clarify understandings you reach with people -- particularly with service providers or school administrators. A third reason is that documents that are written when something happens support you when you need to prove that the event happened the way you say it happened.


Keep a Journal

It can take years for parents to realize that they should have kept better notes of meetings, telephone calls, and important events in their child's educational career. If your young child has a disability in need of special education, get ahead of the game by developing this habit now.

Your notes may be important later when you need an accurate description of what key people said at a TEAM meeting, at a parent meeting, or in an
evaluator's office.

Some parents keep a journal with dates, short descriptions of events or conversations, and the names of people who were involved. This doesn't mean
you need to include every tiny detail of your child's life, but a well-kept journal can help you explain to others (or to yourself) how you got to the current
situation.

Try to record these events:

Dates of meetings with school personnel Dates you received key documents (such as notices of TEAM meetings)

Dates you sent or delivered key documents

Dates you gave school personnel important information (such as "1/7/99: Told Mary's teacher that she'd been spending three hours every night trying to do 15-minute math assignments").

Dates on which your child was suspended or disciplined

Create Agreements

Some documents are designed to record understandings reached with others. The most formal example of this is a contract signed by the parties who agree to its terms. (Note: An IEP is really a contract. It records an agreement reached between parents and school systems that governs: 1) the types
of services to be delivered to a child for a specific period of time; 2) the location of those services; and 3) the identity of service providers. It's signed by each party.

Even without an "official" agreement, you can create your own document to help prove that an understanding was reached. Here's an example:

Your special education director tells you that the school system will hire an expert on inclusion techniques. You'll be given the chance to meet with the expert about your child. Follow up this conversation with a friendly letter to the director. In the letter, thank her for taking the time to discuss your concerns about the classroom, and describe your understanding of the steps she promised to take. End your letter by asking the director to respond immediately if you have misunderstood anything.

Meeting Your Lawyer

When parents ask an attorney or lay advocate for advice on their child's rights under IDEA, the first thing the adviser must do is review all the relevant
documents. How should you organize them?

Special education lawyers will ask you to send copies of all your child's documents in chronological order before you meet. This gives the lawyers a chance to read them and get a full picture of your child and what has been done for her in the special education system. Unless the lawyer or advocate asks, don't try to organize your documents by category (IEP's in one file, evaluations in another, correspondence in another). The most efficient way for the lawyer to understand your child's history is to see the development step by step.

Because you may present documents as exhibits at a hearing or in court, don't write comments on them. (You can make notes with post-its.)

You should also give the lawyer a chronology of the events that have led you to consult with him. This doesn't have to be extremely detailed. Shoot for an outline that gives some perspective on what led to your child's current situation.

Finally, you should give your lawyer or advocate a list of all the key people that have been involved with you or your child. Include their full names, addresses, and phone numbers if you can.


Formal Discovery

If your search for services leads to a formal due-process proceeding, you'll have whatever "discovery" rights are available under the rules in your state. Usually these rules allow parties to have the opposing parties produce documents that are either relevant to the issues the hearing officer must decide or may lead to relevant evidence.

Here are some of the documents lawyers will typically ask school systems to produce in formal discovery:

Descriptions of proposed programs;
Copies of your child's proposed daily or weekly schedule under the proposed IEP;
Copies of the daily or weekly schedules of proposed service providers;
Copies of curricula, materials, behavioral plans, that govern the classrooms where your child would be placed;
Resumes and information on the certification, training, and experience of proposed service providers;
Profiles of other students with whom the school system proposed to place the child;
IEP's of the other students (with their names blacked out);
Reports of any program or fiscal audits of the school system and of the particular program in which the school system proposes to place your child;
Annual or other reports that the school system files with the state education
agency about special education programs; and
Minutes taken by school system personnel at any key meetings about your child (especially TEAM meetings).
Return to Top
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Preparing for an IEP
Brought to you by the Council for Exceptional Children

Questions for Each Team Member

It helps if each team member has questions to think about in advance, to focus her thoughts. The following are lists of the kinds of questions that different IEP (Individualized Education Program) team members might need to think about before attending a meeting. Questions such as these could be typed out and distributed to team members several weeks before the meeting, so that everyone has time to prepare for a discussion.

General Education Teacher

What are the student's strengths?

What is the general education curriculum?

What are the state and local educational standards? Where is the student functioning within these?

Is the student participating in state and local assessments? If yes, how is she faring?

What kind of goals and benchmarks might be important for this student?

What learning and instructional strategies and environments work best for this student?

What kind of support or help might be important for the student?

What kind of support would help me to assist this student?

What kind of assistance or information could the family and student provide?

Does the student have any behavior issues we should be addressing?


Special Educators and Related Services Providers

What are the student's strengths?

Where is the student functioning within the context of the general education curriculum?

How is the student faring with the general education state and/or local assessments?

What kind of goals and benchmarks do I have for this student?

What progress has this student made?

What can I do to help this student's performance to improve?

Is the student receiving the appropriate and necessary accommodations and modifications?

How can the family reinforce what this student is learning at school?

Do we need assistance from other persons or agencies?

How can we address any behavior issues the student may have?

Local Education Agency Representative

Have I reviewed this student's file?

What is the general education curriculum, and what are the district standards and assessments that apply to this student?

What options and resources can the district offer in support of this student?

Am I authorized to commit these resources?

Are the supports in place that will allow this student's teachers to attend the IEP team meeting?

What kind of help could the rest of the building staff offer to this student and family?

Family

What does my child do well?

What does my child struggle with?

What are my long-range goals for my son or daughter?

What skills would increase the independence of my son or daughter?

What goals would strengthen us as a family?

Are there transportation or mobility issues?

What do I want the school to do for my child?

What particular things do I want the school to report to me about?

What should I know to be able to support my child's progress at school and at home?

How and when are good times for the school to contact me when this is necessary?

What if there is an emergency or crisis?

How can I communicate with the school? Should I send notes? Who and when should I call?

What information should I give to the school on an ongoing basis?Student

What am I good at doing?

What is hard for me to do?

What do I like to do?

What do I want to accomplish right now? What skills will I need? How might I get them? What help will I need?

What works well for me in the general education class? Am I experiencing any problems?

What do I want to be when I grow up?


Evaluation Person

What are the student's strengths?

What are the implications of the evaluation results for the student's educational program?

Has the parent been given copies of all evaluations prior to the meeting?

Has the parent had a chance to discuss these evaluations with relevant personnel?
 

Agency Representatives Involved in Transition Planning

What do I know about the strengths and goals of this student?

Starting at age 14 (or earlier), what course of study will help the student reach her long-term goals?

What services can my agency offer?

What am I authorized to offer and what kinds of commitments am I authorized to make on behalf of my agency?

How might my agency cooperate or link with other agencies to provide support?


Other People Invited by the Parents or the School

What are the student's strengths?

What are the student's interests?

How do I think that this student learns best?

Under what circumstances have I observed this student being successful?

What kinds of support would help this student be successful in the future?

How can I help?


A final consideration when preparing for the meeting: When it is time to reevaluate a student, the IEP team now may decide if it needs additional information about the student. In other words, the team is no longer required to complete a "full and comprehensive" evaluation of student factors that had been assessed before. If the team decides that no new information is needed, then it must notify the parents and tell them that they have the right to a full and comprehensive evaluation if they want one.
Return to Top
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The IEP Cycle
Brought to you by the Council for Exceptional Children

The IEP (Individualized Education Program) process is a shared responsibility of the community, the family, and the school. The development of an IEP is also part of a cycle that begins with a particular child. The cycle has the following steps:

1. Referral: The cycle begins when either you or a teacher notices that your child is struggling with some aspect of his schooling and requests that he be referred for potential special education services. A committee then meets to decide whether your child's difficulties are severe enough to warrant a formal evaluation. You must give permission for your child to be evaluated. In addition, you must be invited to this and any other meeting regarding the identification, evaluation, or placement of your child. In this regard, a meeting means a "prearranged event" and not an unscheduled or informal conversation among school personnel.

2. Evaluation: Evaluations must be conducted by a multidisciplinary team. Many different methods, tests, and materials are used to evaluate children. The purpose is to understand your child's strengths and needs. The team may look at issues such as educational performance, medical history, social interactions at school and at home, psychological evaluations, and other factors. Any information provided by you must be considered by the team.

3. Eligibility: Once the data have been gathered, you and a team of professionals meet to discuss the results of the evaluation and decide if your child has a disability. Definitions of disabilities, such as hearing impairments, emotional disturbances, and specific learning disabilities, are spelled out in state and federal laws. If your child is found eligible, then the committee must decide if he, because of his disability, needs special education.

4. Development: If your child is found eligible for special education, then the IEP team is formed and meets to develop the IEP.

5. Implementation: After the IEP has been developed, your child's special education program and services begin.

6. Annual review: The IEP team reviews your child's IEP at least once a year to discuss whether he is meeting his goals, to set new goals and objectives, and to revise the educational program and services as necessary.

This cycle is an orderly one that is required by law. The process is designed to assure that children receive the services they need, as well as to provide legal protection for the rights of children with disabilities and their families.
Return to Top
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Know your rights


Your school system, under IDEA and its state counterparts, is required to fully evaluate any child who may need special education services "in all areas related to the suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance,
communicative status, and motor abilities." (34 CFR Sec. 300.532)

Before the school does so, and before providing or changing special education services, it must notify you in writing. For the first evaluation and placement,
schools must also obtain parental consent. IDEA's requirements for parental consent vary depending on whether the LEA is seeking an initial evaluation or a
reevaluation and on whether the parents affirmatively respond to a request for consent, simply do not respond, or cannot be located.

IDEA (20 USC Ch 33 Sec 1414 (c)(3)) provides that an LEA must "obtain informed parental consent . . . prior to conducting any re-evaluation of a child
with a disability, except that such informed parent consent need not be obtained if the local educational agency can demonstrate that it had taken reasonable measures to obtain such consent and the child's parent has failed to respond."

Thus, while an LEA may proceed to re-evaluate without parental consent, that is true only if it has first taken reasonable, documentable measures to obtain consent. This means the LEA must be able to show documents such as records of attempts to call the parents, correspondence to and from the parents, and/or records of visits to the parents' home or place(s) of employment. (Per 34 C.F.R. sec. 300.345(d)) If parents do respond, but affirmatively refuse to consent to the LEA's re-evaluation, the LEA would have to seek an order to override the parents' refusal to consent. (34 C.F.R. sec. 300.505(b))

For an initial evaluation, it appears that even with documentable reasonable efforts to obtain consent, if the parents do not respond, the LEA cannot go
ahead with the evaluation without further steps. In that case, if the reason consent could not be obtained is that the parents cannot be identified or
located, presumably the LEA could seek the appointment of an educational surrogate (see 20 U.S.C. sec. 1415(b)(2)), or seek an order from the due process agency (presumably, this would be a "matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child" and thus within the agency's jurisdiction.) If parents respond but refuse to consent to the initial evaluation, the LEA can seek an order from the due process agency to permit the
evaluation. (34 C.F.R. sec. 300.505(b))

As a parent, you must make sure that all areas of possible need are assessed as quickly as possible. While some parents would rather not allow their school
system to evaluate their child, a refusal to cooperate at this stage of the process can backfire if you need to ask for more or for different services later. It may also affect your ability to have the school system pay for an independent evaluation.
Return to Top
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Due Process Hearings
Robert K. Crabtree

Powerful but costly

Please note: Every state's due process system for deciding special education disputes is different, though there are many common elements. This commentary addresses general themes in special education law and process. Before taking any steps, parents should find out what particular law and
process applies where they live.

Every state has a system for impartial hearing officers to decide whether an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) that has been rejected by parents meets the legal requirements under IDEA and the state's own special education laws. Special education hearings are generally run like trials in civil courts, but are less formal. Procedural and evidentiary rules that apply in courtrooms are more loosely applied in these proceedings. Hearings are run by hearing officers who are independent of both the school system and the state educational agency responsible for administering special education programs in the state.

As in a civil trial, the party (usually the parents) who raised the issue being tried must proceed first. They introduce documents and oral testimony to make their case. Each of their witnesses is subject to cross-examination by the other party and to questioning at any time by the hearing officer. The responding party (usually the school system) then introduces its witnesses, who in turn may be cross-examined by the other party and questioned by the hearing officer. At the end of the responding party's case, the other party may introduce evidence to rebut new points that have been raised by the responding party.

An official record is made of the proceeding. To date, such records have normally been made by tape recorder and only occasionally by a court reporter. Recent amendments to IDEA allow parents to choose whether proceedings will be recorded orally or in a written record. A court reporter's record of a hearing is generally more accurate and easier to use on appeal than a tape recording, so if parents are given the choice under the new provision, they should ordinarily request that a written record be made.

Arguments can be made both at the opening of a party's presentation and at the end of the hearing. Usually closing arguments are presented in writing a week or two after the last day of the hearing. The hearing officer then writes his or her decision, which either party can appeal to federal or state court.

Over the years since IDEA became effective, due process hearings have become increasingly sophisticated, complex and costly. They have always been stressful, as parents' passion to meet their children's needs collide with educators' professional pride in their programs and a commitment to keep special education costs within budget. They have also served as a battle ground for competing educational philosophies (as for example between "inclusion" on the one hand and more intensive and separate services on the other). Too often, personality conflicts between parents and school officials take precedence over the needs of the child. At their best, however, hearings give parents a level playing field to challenge school systems that want to avoid providing appropriate services because of cost or misguided educational philosophy.

Before they decide to proceed to hearing, parents should educate themselves as much as possible about the specific issues in their case and the ways cases similar to theirs have been decided. They should evaluate whether they have the strong, believable expert testimony they will need to support their case, and they should consider the tangible and intangible consequences of proceeding through hearing, even if they win. For example, parents of very young children need to remember that they have many years ahead of them in the school system and should consider whether their ability to work for their child's best interests over those years will be improved or undermined by taking the school system to a hearing. Is the particular issue in dispute worth it? A satisfactory result achieved through negotiation is certainly preferable. On the other hand, many families who have demonstrated their willingness to use the hearing process have found that their views are treated with greater respect in the future.

Although parents may represent themselves in these proceedings, it is usually wiser to engage an attorney or advocate who is experienced with special
education litigation. If parents prevail, they are entitled under IDEA to recover all or part of their attorney's fees and expenses from the school system. (Note that recent changes in IDEA will restrict the recovery of fees in certain cases. Also note that current case law bars fee awards for non-lawyer advocates under IDEA.)
Return to Top
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Building Bridges Between Home and School
Jerome J. Schultz, Ph.D.

You can enjoy a healthy, respectful, and supportive relationship with your child's school. These steps will help you strengthen your communication skills and make this school year a positive experience for you, your child, and your child's teacher.

Two-Way Communication

The issue:
A key to successful home/school relationships is regular two-way communication. As a parent, what can you do to make sure this happens?

The solution:
Don't expect to do much serious talking about your child's needs at an open house. Use that occasion to meet the teacher, let the teacher see who you are, visit the classroom, and hear about your child's program. Then, call the teacher in a day or two and ask for a meeting at a mutually agreeable time. Before the meeting you can send the teacher a list (not too long) of questions that you have (so she can prepare for the meeting), and you can also share with the teacher your "wishes and worries" for your child.

You can also let the teacher know how you think your child learns best and what will really motivate (or turn off) your son or daughter. If the teacher doesn't ask you how she would like you to be involved as a parent, then ask the teacher. Let the teacher know if there are any reasons that you might not be able to do what she would like you to do (you know -- you're a single parent with two jobs and you're the scout leader and you sing in the choir and you're getting your master's degree over the Internet -- that kind of thing).

Ask the teacher how much contact she likes to have with parents and when she prefers to talk and how (face to face, over the phone, via email). If you find that you have difficulty talking with the teacher for any reason, let her know why. If this simple, honest communication doesn't work, then call the principal to ask for help. You may wish to have your spouse or partner do the talking, or you may need or prefer to use an intermediary, such as the learning center teacher or a guidance counselor. Whatever you do, don't stop talking! Your child is too important.

Building a Foundation

The issue:
When "healthy" relationships exist between home and school, teachers and parents value the expertise that each of them bring to the situation. When parents and teachers work together to build the foundation of a team, everybody benefits. As a parent, what can you do to contribute to your child's class or school, and what are some ways you can value and support the talents that the teacher brings to the classroom?

The solution:
First, let's consider why a teacher might not rush to tap the resources of a willing parent, or might have trouble thinking of a parent as a member of a team. A teacher might be wary of this "free service" if he has had a bad experience with parents in the past. Parents who force themselves on a teacher, who intrude on a teacher's personal life, or who work themselves into the classroom with a personal gripe or "agenda" are not likely to be regarded by a teacher as a valuable asset. If you sense some resistance, move slowly, but persist, showing your child's teacher that you can really be a team player. Let the teacher know that you want to be informed about what's going on in the classroom, and let him know how you might help. You might even volunteer to be the editor of a student-produced class newsletter, so all parents can stay informed about classroom activities.

You and other parents can support the teacher in a variety of ways -- by chaperoning field trips, preparing specialized materials for students, or even
creating learning centers which focus on a certain topic or theme. You can generate a survey form on which parents (at an open house, in a school newsletter, or a school's Internet site) can indicate their willingness to share a talent, some information, a service, or a product with the school. If you have the time and energy, you might develop and coordinate a pool of parents who can help out in a variety of ways. A creative building principal might even be able to find a grant that could pay you to put together a dependable parent-support network.

Help your child's teacher put his or her best skills to work in the classroom. By assisting with various non-teaching functions, you can give the teacher more
\time to be creative in the classroom. Every teacher wants a teammate who can do that!

The issue:
Some parents are upset that schools expect too much of them, while others wish that they could have a greater role in the life of the school. Sometimes
schools blame parents for not contributing enough or for their lack of involvement in school activities. At other times, teachers and administrators feel
that parents have over-stepped a boundary. In healthy schools, teachers and administrators have a realistic view of what parents can and should contribute, and parents understand what is expected of them. There are concrete ways that parents and schools can insure that expectations on both sides are realistic.

The solution:
Teachers and administrators might spend part of a faculty meeting creating an image of an "ideal" parent. The resulting list of qualities and contributions might then be presented to parents (in a newsletter or at an open house). This would give parents a better idea about what teachers regard as helpful parent behavior. In the same way, parents (at a PTA meeting, perhaps) could generate a list of teacher behaviors and school policies that allow and encourage the level of involvement they would like to have in the school. These might include inviting parents into the classroom to provide services or materials, or contributing to the delivery of instruction by sharing photos, travel stories, etc. This type of exercise could be carried further by asking teachers and parents (perhaps in a small focus group) to identify the things that get in the way of "good" parent participation.

Schools need to understand that you may want to contribute or be involved, but you may find it almost impossible to do what the school expects (like finding a baby sitter who has the stamina to stay with the hyperactive twins, so you or your spouse can attend an open house). Schools need to ask you what and
how you can contribute, and then value even the smallest contribution (for example: cutting out seasonal objects for school bulletin boards at home.)

The goal of a school should be to involve all parents in some way. This might require giving up activities that have always been done, even though they
involve only a few parents in a few ways (like the obligatory parents' night). For starters, parents should decide at least one way they can comfortably
contribute time, resources, services or energy to the school. Teachers should do their part to welcome parents into the school, and they should reinforce any parent behaviors that help the teacher help the students.

An Open Door

The issue:
In schools that value family involvement, parents are welcome in the school at appropriate times and in appropriate ways. What can you do to open the
schoolhouse doors and keep them open?

The solution:
There are lots of helpful and non-intrusive ways that parents can be involved in the life of a school. Some schools have set up parent/teacher reception areas, where a pot of hot coffee becomes a morning magnet for parents who can meet other parents and stay tuned in to what's going on in the school. A bulletin board -- on which parents can post messages, ideas, or volunteer certain services -- can become a valuable resource to teachers and parents alike. Parents can coordinate and run this area.

Sometimes the crowded hallways of a school make it difficult for parents to visit the building in large numbers, but a very warm feeling exists in elementary schools that encourage parents to escort their children to the classroom at morning drop-off. Teachers and parents develop much closer relationships when this happens, especially when they both resist the temptation to focus on kids' problems at this time.

Lots of very positive things happen when parents host teacher appreciation luncheons or when family breakfasts or luncheons are held by grade level.
Parents are always welcome to serve as chaperones on field trips, or when they work in the office or media center. In some schools, pairs of parents serve as hall monitors or tutors for kids who can just step outside of the class for a little academic support or some TLC.

Every year, American Education Week, sponsored by the National Education Association, provides a more formal opportunity for parents to visit schools and classrooms. The bottom line is that schools that actively encourage parents to be in the building, on the bus, or in the classroom are schools in which kids learn better and behave better.

Pitching In

The issue:
Schools attempt to find out what different parents are willing and able to contribute to their child's education and to the school. Schools that are serious
about increasing parent and family involvement accept and value any contributions that parents can make. As a parent, what can you do to give even
more to the school, and to encourage the school to keep asking you and other parents to be involved?

The solution:
After open house or "Parent's Night," think about ways you can add something can do to help the principal achieve his or her goals for the year. If you and every other parent do just one thing to support the school, the quality of your child's education and the learning and social environment of the school will improve.

If you can do something significant for the school, that's great, but even if you contribute in some small way to a large project, you can show your support. One parent organized a fund-raising campaign in a middle school that enabled parents to purchase bricks embossed with family member's names and birth dates. Each brick was added to a courtyard which not only beautified the school, but also gave each "bricklayer" a sense of pride and involvement.

Other schools ask parents to make learning materials or to read books onto tapes so that kids with reading problems can listen to all of the great stories that are in the school library. In one high school, a father organized a family work weekend in the community. Parents, kids, and their teachers worked together to repair and repaint an unused gymnasium. After transforming it into a community activities center, they finished the day with a delicious potluck supper. Working together on this project gave everyone a shared experience that changed their relationships inside and outside of the classroom. This kind of involvement helps strengthen not only a school, but an entire community.

Benefit of the Doubt

The issue:
Schools that value good home/school relations do not make erroneous assumptions about a parent or a family when they do not seem to be involved.
These schools recognize that parents and caregivers deserve the benefit of the doubt.

The solution:
Professional educators understand that while we may be very concerned about the welfare and education of our children, there may be times when we're unable to attend school functions such as open house. Many forces can make it difficult for a parent to come to the school, or to be involved in a child's education. The demands of a job or the necessity of a second job, the challenge of finding child care for young children at home, difficulty with transportation to the school, or concerns about safety in the neighborhood around the school are all valid explanations for a parent's physical absence from school.

For some parents, coming to school has been associated with trouble, and they are nervous about meeting with teachers. Other parents really want to get involved in school activities, but they get the impression that this will take a lot of energy and time, both of which may be in short supply.

Good schools understand the realities of family life and give parents the benefit of the doubt when they don't seem involved in school affairs. Some schools have found ways to make it possible for parents to stay in touch with teachers without always having to leave home. Newsletters sent home each week carry news about classroom and school activities. Some schools have call-in times (with some in the evening) that make it easier for parents to talk directly with teachers. Phone "chains" can be set up that allow parents to "pass the word" about school activities and events, or to discuss ways parents can contribute to school life. Answering devices or voicemail systems allow teachers to record daily or weekly messages to parents.

Technologically advanced schools have Internet sites or email connections that tie home and school together electronically. Some teachers have created (or have had their students create) videotapes of themselves and their classrooms -- a technique that brings open house to everyone.

Parents who feel left out of school affairs need to be assertive and ask principals and teachers how they can be involved. Research shows us that
when parents are more involved in school, kids behave better, like school more, and most important, learn better.

The issue:
Schools that want to involve parents need to understand the impact of school-related tasks (e.g., homework or coming to open house) on the child and on the family.

The solution:
Teachers may give what for most students is a simple half-hour homework assignment. In some families, however, getting the homework done may be a
major event. If a child has learning or attentional problems, or if he says: "The teacher didn't tell us what to do," a single activity can turn into a major battle which can go on for hours and cause tension for everyone. Planning and executing long-term assignments can be a nightmare for families -- one that often ends with Mom or Dad "pulling an all-nighter" to finish typing a paper.

Parents and teachers should talk to each other periodically about the impact of homework on the family. Some teachers send home "test" homework, telling kids to do as much work as they can in 30 minutes and then stop. Students might also be given one assignment that must involve a parent, and another one on which parents are not allowed to help. This allows teachers to check the quality and impact of work done with -- and without -- adult assistance.

For most children, having a parent come to an open house is a positive event. They look forward to this evening as a time for parents to meet their teacher, sit in their seat (or try to), and see their work. For other children, the thought of parents coming to school may create anxiety, especially if they are worried about the teacher talking about their "problems," or if they are not proud of a project that the teacher has displayed for the event. Children with separation problems, or who are afraid an older sibling may neglect or tease them, may not be able to tolerate a parent's absence for an evening. In these situations, teachers and parents need to talk and work together to develop effective solutions.

Mutual Respect

The issue:
Schools that value good communication between the home and school must develop ways to maintain contact with the parent over time in a way that builds mutual respect.

The solution:
Teachers and parents can build an atmosphere of mutual respect if each tries to understand the other's perspective. Parents understandably and appropriately tend to focus their attention on their own children, while teachers think of the individual students as members of a group.

Parents and teachers need to keep expectations clear. This requires keeping the lines of communication open, and that's something parents and teachers both have to work on. As a way to provide the time that's necessary to build relationships, some creative schools pair families with a teacher who will remain with the family over the course of the school years. These kinds of relationships can last well beyond graduation!

As a parent, you should know what's going on in your child's classroom and why. A teacher who values good communication with parents will invite you to ask questions, and explain why things are done the way they are. If you are concerned about how things are done, talk to the teacher about it. While you're trying to come to a better understanding, keep this communication between you and the teacher -- don't talk about it over the salad bar at the grocery store. On the other hand, if you see good things happening in the classroom, tell everyone you know. Praise for teachers seems to be in short supply these days, and it's important to broadcast good news about schools.

Flexibility

The issue:
Parents are more likely to get involved and stay involved when they feel that the school respects them and their unique situation. Schools
that have an inflexible "one role fits all parents" rule close doors to parents who may be going through tough times.

The solution:
Teachers (many of whom are parents themselves) know that the ability of parents to be involved depends on many things. Mothers and fathers may be dealing with a family illness or the problems of an aging parent, conflict between family members, financial or job-related stress, or the academic or behavior problems with another child. Parents who have a close, trusting relationship with teachers feel more comfortable talking with them about such family issues, because they trust that this information will be kept in confidence. Some parents may prefer to share confidential information with a school guidance counselor, who will then keep a watchful eye on the child and provide necessary consultation to teachers.

Teachers know that these situations may have an impact on a child's work or behavior at school and if they know about what's going on at home, they can take these situations into consideration as they work with students. When trust is high, and when schools are flexible in their expectations of parents, everybody benefits.

Open Minds

The issue:
Schools must attempt to involve and engage all parents, regardless of socioeconomic status, place of residence, or their contributions to school-related activities.

The solution:
It has been said that "it's where you live that counts," when it comes to the quality of the relationship parents and children have with schools. Too often, parents believe that if you come from an under-resourced school in an impoverished neighborhood, the school neglects you. Meanwhile, many people feel that "rich parents in rich schools" get all the "goods." This may be a misperception.

It is very often the case that families that are struggling to meet the basic needs of their children are more likely to use the school as a kind of community center. They are more likely to be in the building, providing and receiving support, and connecting with teachers and other parents in a safe, familiar environment. For them, the school is rather like a fortress that offers them and their children sustenance and protection from a sometimes hostile environment.

Principals and teachers of some schools complain that parents may only get involved when they are disappointed with teachers or policies of the school. In these schools, the challenge is to convert parent from complainers and critics into contributors and complimentors. Parents need to ask themselves which category they  belong to, remembering that when school/home relationships are positive, kids like school more, behave better, and learn better. In
healthy schools, there is a comfortable and productive collaboration between teachers and parents, regardless of their socioeconomic status or where they live. Parents who are only able to give a little are valued as much as those who are "big donors" of time or services.

Giving Feedback

issue:
Schools that value parent input and involvement need to solicit and use feedback from parents. Parents who want to do the best job they can to help their children and the school must value and use feedback from the teacher.

The solution:
If car manufacturers asked for and actually used the amount of feedback most schools get from their "customers," they'd go out of business! Schools with good self-concepts give parents and children lots of opportunities to give the school a "report card." While professional educators are responsible for making
informed decisions about how to deliver instruction, unless they ask parents and children what the experience is like for them, they're "not playing with a full
deck."It's important that schools listen to parents who hear their kids complaining that work is boring, too hard, or too easy. It's also important to listen to parents who have a sense that something's not right with the curriculum (for example, when parents discover that the same content is being taught by both the third- and the fourth-grade science teacher -- oops!)

It's great when parents are able to accept and use feedback offered by their child's teacher. This can happen more often if teachers share information at a level and in an amount that parents can accept at this point in their lives as parents. Of course, this calls for a degree of sensitivity and skill on the part of the teacher. It also helps a lot when parents ask the teacher for feedback, making it clear to the teacher that the door to communication is open, and that parents are receptive and ready.

Positive Feedback

The issue:
In schools that value good school/home relationships, parents and teachers should offer positive feedback to each other in a variety of ways.

The solution:
Creative and forward-thinking schools find ways for teachers and parents to offer thanks and congratulations to each other. There are many ways to reinforce good teaching. A flower on a desk, a note of praise to a supervisor, a potluck teacher appreciation supper or lunch, or a gift certificate for a meal -- these gestures all go a long way in making a teacher feel valued. Teachers and administrators also need to express their thanks for even the smallest contribution from parents. This might be the gift of time (as a chaperone on a field trip or a member of a telephone "chain" to send messages to one another, or a service (such as teaching the children in the class how to create a website) or the creation of teaching materials or resources (making books on tape, finding a guest "expert" to do a presentation, etc.). When parents feel that their contributions are valued by teachers, they are more likely to provide a continuous stream of support that benefits the entire school.

A great many expectations are made of teachers who are too often undervalued. Parents, too, are busier than ever, and they appreciate it when schools offer them a "menu" of valued ways to help the school. To keep the creative energies flowing, both teachers and parents need to know that their efforts are appreciated; they need to find many ways to say to each other: "Thank you for a job well done."

The issue:
Teachers and other professionals at school play an integral role as part of your child's treatment team. "Healthy" schools work willingly with parents and with professionals who provide services to a child outside of school. How can parents improve the communication that goes on between a child's teachers and other professionals (pediatrician, occupational therapist, family therapist, etc.)?

The solution:
First of all, let the folks at the school know it's okay if they talk to other people working with your child, and vice-versa. Sign all the necessary release of
information forms, and distribute the names and phone numbers of all care providers.

If your child has special needs or health-related problems, it's likely that there are several people involved in his or her care. None of these folks can do their best work in isolation. This is especially true when there is a need to monitor the side-effects or effectiveness of medication. Help these people help your child by building bridges between and among them. Faxing or hand-carrying written summaries or photocopies of one professional's work to another is one way you can help (and find out what they're saying about your child at the same time!).

Since time is such a valuable commodity for teachers and other professionals, find out the best times for doctors, therapists, and teachers to talk on the phone. Share this information (along with phone, fax, and beeper numbers, or email addresses) with team members. Remember that some teachers and doctors may not have had a lot of experience talking to each other as professionals, so there might be some resistance about making the contact. If you do sense any unwillingness, remember: It's your child they are talking about. So do what you can to help them "get over it."

Put the Past in the Past

The issue:
Schools must do their best to separate problems they had with parents in the past from current relationships, and work hard not to perpetuate negative family images. Parents can also move forward when they don't let the baggage of past events get in the way of future successes.

The solution:
In the field of medicine, a doctor may not agree with the political views of a particular patient, but she has a professional obligation to do her very best job to heal or save the patient. Teachers have this same sense of obligation when dealing with families who have been hard to deal with in the past. Teachers and other professionals need to minimize the extent to which past negative dealings with a parent affect their current work with a family. This is especially important with parents of children with special needs, who must readjust to the impact of the handicapping condition every time the child faces new challenges and responsibilities. This can result in what has been called "chronic sorrow," and teachers may be on the receiving end of some very bad feelings on the part of parents. They must be prepared to take some of this "grief" from families, and help them come to terms with the underlying concerns they have about their child.

Kids (and their parents) deserve a fresh start. Professional teachers understand this. They work hard not to prejudice their thinking about a child or his or her family, even if they have had some negative interactions in the past. Parents need to give teachers a chance, too. Sometimes, parents may hear something about a teacher that makes them wonder if that person will be the best teacher for their child. But the fact that one family had a conflict with a particular teacher does not mean that you will as well. When parents show their support for a teacher, and resist the temptation to pre-judge a teacher's ability to do his or her job well, things usually work out for the best. However, if there are chronic problems with a teacher, don't be shy about sharing your concerns with the principal.

Reasonable Requests

The issue:
Parents' requests of the school need to be reasonable. Under usual circumstances, parents of children with disabilities should need only to request rather than demand services, and they need to be reasonably patient before moving to "demand mode."

The solution:
Special education laws, specifically the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and your state's local interpretation of this federal law, determine what schools must do to provide a "free and appropriate education" for your child with special needs. It is usually very easy to determine if a school system is out of compliance -- not doing for your child what the law requires. In cases that are less clear, parents may have to use an advocate or even an attorney to help them determine whether their child's rights are being violated. At any rate, the law is on the side of the child and the family.

The special education laws were developed to provide children with a reasonably good education and not a perfect education. So, if you start to demand services or accommodations that are deemed excessive, don't be surprised when the school digs in its heels. But if you feel that your school is not providing services that are clearly indicated because it can't afford to (or for any other reason), then call them to task -- or call your state's Department of Special Education or the Office for Civil Rights.

The Teacher's Knowledge

The issue:
Parents need to understand that teachers may have different levels of understanding and training regarding learning disabilities or other special needs, and that teachers require additional support to enable them to serve their students appropriately.

The solution:
Parents need to accept the fact the some teachers, especially "mature" regular-classroom educators, who are working in inclusive settings for the first time, may have had little or no training in how to work with children with special needs. This is frustrating, and, of course, parents want to insure that all people working with their children have the necessary training and skills. Since the inclusion movement has hit schools quickly and has sometimes caught teachers unaware, parents need to be somewhat tolerant of gaps in learning or knowledge of specialized techniques.

Do what you can to find out what kinds of staff development related to special education have been provided or are planned for your child's teachers (and the administration). Parents might want to ask the teacher if the training is sufficient to meet their needs, and what more it would take for that to happen. Then parents can work together with the school to find grant funding or other resources to support the training and consultation necessary for inclusion to be something other than intrusion or delusion.

The Grieving Process

The issue:
Schools understand that parents are at different stages in terms of their understanding and acceptance of a child's disability and their ability or willingness to work cooperatively with the school.

The solution:
Simply stated, parents of children with special needs have to be given the time to "tell their story." Unless schools provide periodic opportunities for parents to let teachers and other professionals know something about what it's really like to have "a kid like this," teachers won't get a picture of the whole child. Parents will find it easier to engage with and trust teachers who can understand the impact of a child with disabilities on their family.

Parents of children with special needs undergo stages of adjustment during which they actually grieve the loss of their "ideal" child. Sensitive teachers
understand this phenomenon and strive to assess the level of a family's adjustment to the handicapping condition (for example, whether parents are in denial or angry or have come to accept the reality of the condition).

Teachers and other professionals in responsive schools reach out to families by visiting their homes or by setting up informal "chats" at neutral locations like a local coffee shop. This gives them the opportunity to really hear the family story. When teachers do this, parents consistently report a greater degree of closeness and understanding with them -- and children benefit.

Hint: If your child's teachers don't take the initiative to set up such meetings, you may need to make the arrangements -- the result is well worth the effort.

The issue:
How can schools serve as a resource or referral source for families of children with special needs?

The solution:
Parents of children with special needs can be overwhelmed by the vast array of resources and materials that claim to answer all their questions. Most parents don't have the time (or energy, after dealing with challenging kids!) to read all the books or materials that hit the marketplace. Teachers can make recommendations about books, articles, videotapes, or other materials that address a parent's specific need or question. But first, parents need to let teachers know what they are looking for, or what they have already tried and found to be unsatisfactory. You should be able to count on teachers and other professionals at the school (psychologists, speech and language therapists, nurses, etc.) to direct you to support groups, information and referral services, or professionals who can help you deal with problems or issues related to your child's special needs.

Parents who have been put in touch with helpful resources by teachers, or who have found good materials themselves, can also donate or loan books or tapes to a parent resource file or library -- or start one if none exists! This might be a great project for the school's special education parent advisory group.

The issue:
When there's a healthy relationship between home and school, teachers and parents strive to achieve a common, shared understanding of the nature, extent, and impact of a child's learning disability. They come to agreement on the findings and implications of diagnostic evaluations. What can you do to work toward this type of mutual understanding and shared concern?

The solution:
Under special education law, schools are required to carry out a multidisciplinary evaluation to identify a child's learning disability or other handicapping condition. If the school's assessment team diagnoses your child with LD, make sure you ask them to explain their findings in language that you understand. You may need to hear the information more than once, and you might find it helpful to ask a friend or a professional to read the report with you.If the school does not feel that your child has a learning disability, make sure that you understand how they came to this decision. Then you need to know their explanation of the difficulties that brought your child to their attention in the first place. Whether your child's problems in school are due to a learning disability or not, you need to understand and agree with the school's plan of action for your child. Don't say yes or sign anything until you do.

If you disagree with the school's findings, tell them why and give them the chance to explain their conclusions. If you're not satisfied with their response,
special education law gives you the right to have an independent evaluation done outside of the school (make sure you check the school's policy on reimbursement to avoid surprises later on). If the school doesn't agree with the findings of the outside evaluator, they have a professional obligation to have a discussion with this professional, and hopefully to come to some agreement. You should be a part of this discussion.

It's a good idea to have an outside evaluation completed by someone both you and the school respect. You may ask the school for a recommendation and then interview the evaluator yourself before making a decision. The goal here is to avoid an expensive, anxiety-producing, adversarial nightmare, and reach an agreement between the you and your child's school.

Return to Top

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Suspensions, Expulsions, and IEP's
Robert K. Crabtree

Question:

My daughter has a language impairment and has been on an IEP since last year. She has had a rough year and was just suspended
from school for pushing another student into a locker. This is her second suspension this year for fighting. I think she's getting into these fights because she has so much trouble understanding how to use words in tense social situations. Does the school have to provide her any educational services while she is suspended? The Vice Principal told us he's considering expelling my daughter. Can the school system do that?

Answer:

Your daughter's rights are governed by recent amendments to IDEA concerning suspension or expulsion of children with special educational needs. (These provisions are found mostly at 20 U.S.C. ?1415(k).) The law now states explicitly that a free appropriate public education ("FAPE") must be available to all children with disabilities, "including children with disabilities who have been suspended or expelled from school." (20 U.S.C. ?1412(a)(1)(A).) There is some question whether this applies to a child who is suspended for less than 10 days (even though the statute makes no such distinction, the U.S. Department of Education doesn't think it applies until ten days have passed -- see 34 C.F.R. ?300.520 of the proposed regulations published in the Federal Register on October 22, 1997), but your daughter is certainly entitled under this law to continue to be educated in
accordance with her IEP if she is suspended for any time beyond 10 days.

Alternative educational settings

There are certain behaviors for which a school system can change a student's placement to an "interim alternative educational setting" for up to 45 days
(calendar days, not school days). This is so if the student carries a dangerous weapon to school or a school function or knowingly possesses, uses, sells or attempts to sell illegal drugs at school or at a school function. (?1415(k)(1)(A)).

A school department can also try to convince a hearing officer in your state's special education due process system to order an interim alternative educational placement for up to 45 days by proving that maintaining the child in her current placement "is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or to others." (?1415(k)(2)(A)) In such a case, the hearing officer must find not only that the child represents a real danger, but also that the school system has "made reasonable efforts to minimize the risk of harm in the child's current placement, including the use of supplementary aids and services."

In either case, any alternative educational placement for up to 45 days under these provisions must provide FAPE. Accordingly it must be designed to
"enable the child to continue to participate in the general curriculum" and continue to receive services and modifications, including those in her IEP, "that
will enable the child to meet the goals set out in that IEP." (?1415(k)(3)(B) The placement must also include services to address the behavior for which the student is being suspended in the first place. (A home tutoring program would not normally satisfy these requirements, though if the only alternative is a program for students with severe emotional/behavioral disabilities, sometimes a parent is faced with either accepting an inappropriate home-bound instruction program or placement in a volatile setting with an inappropriate peer group. If it is feasible to use the expedited hearing process, described below, it may be best to accept home tutoring while contesting the matter.)

The behavior of which your daughter has been accused does not fall into the categories that would allow the school system to move her to an alternative 45-day setting since there was apparently no dangerous weapon or drugs involved. While the school could try to convince a hearing officer that she represents a danger to herself or others, it would be unlikely to succeed. It is easy to think of steps the school system could take to "minimize the risk of harm in the child's current placement." Ordinary security measures in the halls, a peer mediation program, the assignment of an aide, and/or modifications to your daughter's IEP are some of the options that might be considered.

Long term suspensions or expulsions

Most importantly, a school system cannot impose a long-term suspension or expel a student with special educational needs if the behavior for which s/he is being disciplined was a "manifestation" of his or her disability. (?1415(k)(4)(B),(C)) IDEA provides that the IEP team must find that behavior was a manifestation of the child's disability if:

the IEP was inappropriate with respect to the behavior or was not being implemented, including appropriate behavior intervention strategies;the child was unable to understand the impact and consequences of her behavior because of her disability; orthe child's disability impaired her ability to control her behavior.
 

If any of these circumstances applies, the IEP team must correct the IEP or its implementation and, except for the 45-day provisions I described earlier, the school cannot legally suspend the student beyond ten days. If the team finds that the behavior is not a manifestation of the child's disability, the school can suspend longer than ten days as it can a student without a disability, but must still provide ongoing education under his/her IEP during the suspension.

In addition to, or as part of, this review (and regardless whether the behavior is found to be a manifestation of the child's disability), the school system must conduct a "functional behavioral assessment" and develop or modify a behavioral intervention plan as necessary to address the behavior for which the student is being disciplined. (?1415(k)(1)(B)) Again, the statute itself makes no distinction for suspensions less than ten days, but the Department of
Education's proposed regulations indicate that this requirement only applies after ten days of suspension. (Proposed 34 C.F.R. ?300.520(b))

In your daughter's case, you will want to be sure that the IEP team evaluates the link between her language processing difficulties and her behavior in stressful circumstances with peers when she does not understand social cues or how to use words rather than physical aggression. The school should also perform a behavioral assessment to see what strategies will help your daughter recognize and re-channel feelings of anger or frustration. She might benefit from a social skills group for students with similar language impairments. If so, that service should be added to her IEP.

Parents are entitled to an expedited hearing if they appeal either a finding that their child's behavior was not a manifestation of his/her disability or a placement decision made under the suspension/expulsion provisions. (?1415(k)(6)) The Department of Education's proposed regulations would require that a decision be rendered in an expedited hearing within ten business days of the hearing request unless the parties agree to a longer period. (Proposed regulation 34 C.F.R. ?300.528(a)(1)) Unless the child is properly moved to a 45-day alternative placement, s/he is entitled to remain in the current educational placement. If s/he has been properly moved to an alternative placement, that is where s/he must remain until either the hearing officer orders a change or the assigned time period for the interim placement expires.

Student rights

The rights I have discussed here apply to students who are already identified as having special educational needs. Importantly, the law also applies to students who the school system knew or should have known have disabilities. IDEA treats a school system as "knowing" about a disability for these purposes if:

a parent expressed concern that his/her child needs special education (this must be in writing unless the parent is illiterate or unable to write because of a disability);

the behavior or performance of the child shows s/he needs such services;a parent requested an evaluation of his/her child; or

a teacher or other school employee has expressed concern about behavior or performance to other school staff. (?1415(k)(8))

Also, even if the school system is not deemed to have "knowledge" of a disability, parents can request an evaluation when their child is being suspended or expelled, which must be expedited. (?1415(k)(8)(C)(ii)) In that case, however, the child must remain in whatever placement is determined by the school pending the outcome of the evaluation.

Obviously, these provisions are very complex and the stakes are high. Moreover, the inter-relationship between these federal requirements and a state's own laws and regulations concerning student discipline will raise many questions. (For example, if a state tries to use a broader definition of "dangerous weapon" than applies under the provisions allowing 45 day interim placements, it may be held that the state's requirements must give way to the federal. It has been held that a state can adopt greater protections for children with special education needs, but not lesser. See David D. v. Dartmouth School Committee, 775 F.2d 411 (1st Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1140 (1986).) If your child is faced with long-term suspension or expulsion you should consult with an expert in special education law to be certain that her rights are protected and that the school system does not lose sight of your child's educational needs in its effort to enforce discipline.
Return to Top
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Pointers For Parents in managing behaviors of children with learning difficulties

1. Give your child the opportunity to know success in non-academic areas of endeavor; you will find that the resulting build-up of self-confidence spills over into the school day.

2. Be firm. Establish clear ground rules when the child is young and keep those rules (with whatever needed amendments) on into adolescents. As the child improves in judgment, give more responsibility.

3. Let the child make decisions for less important matters. Structure the process. Limit the alternatives. This can be a valuable learning experience.

4. Be prepared to accept absent-mindedness of children with learning difficulties. Teach and re-teach the correct approaches. Use prompts and
positive verbal reinforcement. Avoid becoming irritated and escalating behavior. Always repeat the direction as though it was the first time.

5. Get the child's attention before giving instructions. Make eye contact. Speak slowly, firmly, clearly and succinctly.

6. Give the child chores to build a sense of responsibility. Make sure that they are carried out and the behavior praised. Setting the table, making the bed, carrying out the trash are appropriate tasks.

7. Short lists of tasks are excellent to help a child remember. A list is impersonal and reduces irritations and confrontations; the child will gain satisfaction as he/she checks off completed tasks. If the child cannot read, use pictures of tasks.

8. Routines are helpful for all children. Routines need to be modeled, taught, monitored and praised. A routine is part of the family value system.

9. Read to your child. Read to your child. Read to your child.

10. Stay in control of each situation. Ensure boundary setting and teaching the appropriate behavior or task. Stay consistent. Do not give in to tantrums or manipulations. Stay consistent. Learn from your mistakes and restructure the process.

11. Each parent should work with the child but not at the same time except when an extra pair of hands are needed. Even then, it is best that one parent
give the directions for that particular task or event.

12. Parents need to come to terms with their child's strengths and deficits. Goals should be those that challenge but do not extend beyond capabilities. If parents can accept their child's assets and liabilities, the child can then begin to accept him/her-self.

13. Let your child know you love him/her.

                                                                            "The pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity.
                                                                               The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."

Return to Top
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tests and Measurements for the Parent, Teacher, Advocate & Attorney

by Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. and
Pamela Darr Wright, M.A., M.S.W.

Introduction

Most parents of special needs children know that they must understand the law and their rights. Few parents know that they must also understand the facts. The "facts" of their child's case are contained in the various tests and evaluations that have been administered to the child. Changes in test scores over time provide the means to assess educational benefit or regression. Most important educational decisions, from eligibility to the intensity of educational services provided, are based on the results of psychological and educational achievement testing. Parents who obtain appropriate special educational programs for their children have learned what different tests measure and what the test results mean.

As an attorney who specializes in representing special education children, I know that many parents consult with me after deciding that their child's special education program is not appropriate. These parents are often right. However, in most cases they do not have the evidence to support their belief, nor do they know how to interpret and use the evidence contained in educational and psychological tests. They need evidence to support their beliefs.

Often these parents are convinced that a special education program is not providing sufficient help for the child --- that under the present special education program, the child is failing to make progress and has fallen further behind. These parents experience a sense of urgency --- the child has usually received special education for several years and time is running out.

Critical educational decisions are often made, based on the subjective beliefs of parents and educators. As a parent, you may believe that your child is not making adequate progress in a special education program. The special education staff may firmly believe that he is doing as well as he can --- or that your
expectations are too high. Without objective information, both sides will take positions that are based upon emotions --- and tempered by hopes and fears. Effective educational decision-making must be based on objective information and facts, not subjective emotional reactions and beliefs.

Before you can participate in the development of an appropriate special education program, you must have a thorough understanding of your child's strengths and weaknesses. This information is contained in the various tests that are used to measure the child's ability and educational achievement.

To successfully advocate for your child, you must also learn about tests and measurements --- statistics. Statistics are ways of measuring progress or lack of progress, using numbers. After you analyze the scores your child obtains when tested and understand what these numbers mean, you will be able to
develop an appropriate educational program for your child --- a program from which the child benefits.

As you master the material contained in this article, you will understand what various tests and evaluations measure and how to use information from tests to measure academic progress. You will learn how to use graphs to visually demonstrate your child's progress or lack of educational progress in a very powerful and compelling manner.


The United States Supreme Court Florence County School District Four v. Shannon Carter - November 9, 1993

In Florence County School District Four v. Shannon Carter, 510 U. S.7, 114 S. Ct. 361, (1993), the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark decision. In Carter, the school system defaulted on their obligation to provide a free appropriate education to Shannon Carter, a child with learning disabilities and an Attention Deficit Disorder. Let's look at how the courts viewed the facts and the law in the Carter case.

Background

When Shannon was in the seventh grade, her parents talked to the public school staff and expressed concerns about Shannon's reading and academic problems. She was evaluated by a public school psychologist who described Shannon as a "slow learner" who was lazy, unmotivated and needed to be
pressured to try harder. Her parents pressured her to work harder. Despite the intense pressure, when Shannon was in the ninth grade, she failed several subjects. Her parents had her evaluated by a child psychologist. That evaluator determined that Shannon's intellectual ability was actually above average. Educational achievement testing demonstrated that sixteen year old Shannon was reading at the fifth grade level (5.4 GE) and doing math at the sixth grade level (6.4 G.E.). Shannon had dyslexia. As she prepared to enter tenth grade, she was also functionally illiterate.

In Shannon's case, the school district developed an IEP which proposed that after a year of special education in the tenth grade, Shannon would read at the 5.8 grade equivalent level and perform math at the 6.8 grade equivalent level. In other words, after one year of special education designed to remediate her learning disabilities, Shannon was expected to gain only four tenths of a year, as measured by her scores on the Woodcock-Johnson and KeyMath educational achievement tests, a gain from 5.4 to 5.8 and 6.4 to 6.8 grade levels in reading and math respectively.

Shannon's parents insisted that their daughter required a more intensive program so that she could master necessary reading, writing and math skills. They felt that the proposed program was inadequate, and worried that Shannon would still be functionally illiterate when she graduated in three years. Emory
Carter insisted that his daughter should be able to read, write and do arithmetic at a twelfth grade level when she graduated from high school.

Although Emory and Elaine Carter shared their concerns and wishes with the public school officials, the administrators took a "take it or leave it" position and refused to provide Shannon with a more intensive special education program that provided actual remediation in reading, writing, and arithmetic. Seeking
more services for their daughter, the parents requested a special education due process hearing. The Hearing Officer ruled that the public school IEP was appropriate. The parents appealed this decision to a Review Panel and lost again.

At that point, Emory and Elaine Carter withdrew Shannon from her local public high school and enrolled her in Trident Academy. Trident is a private school in Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina that specializes in remediating children with learning disabilities, including dyslexia. Shannon's parents then appealed the Review decision to the U. S. District Court. They asked Judge Houck to award them reimbursement for Shannon's private school education at Trident.

When Shannon graduated from Trident Academy three years later, her reading and math scores were on a high school level.

After hearing testimony and reviewing the transcripts and documents from the Due Process and Review Hearings, U. S. District Court Judge Houck found that the school district's IEP was "wholly inadequate" to meet Shannon's needs. He ruled that Shannon had received an appropriate education at Trident and ordered Florence County to reimburse Shannon's parents for the costs of her education.

On what basis did Judge Houck decide that the IEP proposed by Florence County was inappropriate? What evidence caused him to decide that Shannon received an appropriate education at Trident Academy?


Evidence & Law

The decisions in Shannon's case, and in many special education cases, rest on the evidence provided by various tests and evaluations of the individual child. When Judge Houck wrote that the Florence County's IEP was "wholly inadequate" to meet Shannon's needs, he was relying on his interpretation of the results of testing. Judge Houck understood the importance of accurately interpreting test scores. He charted Shannon's test scores and included this data as part of his U. S. District Court decision. (See also Hall v. Vance, 555 EHLR 437, (E.D. NC 1983), affirmed at 774 F. 2d 629,
557 EHLR 155, (4th Cir. 1985)) in which U. S. District Court Judge Dupree charted out James Hall's test scores to support his 1983 decision that Vance County, North Carolina did not provide James with an appropriate education in the public school program.) When you finish this article, you will also be able to interpret and chart your child's test scores and measure educational progress or lack of progress.

Florence County appealed Judge Houck's decision to the U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Appeals from the U. S. District Courts in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina are heard in the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit by a three judge panel. The Fourth Circuit is composed of thirteen judges. Appeals from U. S. Circuit Courts of Appeals are filed in the U. S. Supreme Court. Occasionally a U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals will convene all Judges appointed to the Circuit to hear a case. This is called an en banc review.

A three judge panel of the Fourth Circuit affirmed Judge Houck's decision as to the inadequacy of Florence County's proposed IEP. Florence County then appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

On November 9, 1993, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision on Shannon's behalf. In the Carter decision, authored by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court upheld the lower decisions, ruled against Florence County School District Four, and ordered them to reimburse Shannon's parents for the costs of her tuition, room and board, and attorney's fees.

Objective Measurement of Progress

IEPs must include objective means of measuring the child's progress in a special education program. Volume 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 300.347, "Content of individualized education program," states that an IEP must include:

(2) A statement of measurable annual goals, including benchmarks or short-term objectives, related to (i) Meeting the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum . .
.
[and]

(7) A statement of (i) How the child’s progress toward the annual goals described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section will be measured; . . .

In Shannon's case, her IEP stated that she "will be able to improve total reading level from the 5.4 grade level to the 5.8 grade level as measured by the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test . . . (and that she) will improve math skills from the 6.4 grade equivalent to the 6.8 grade equivalent as measured by the Key Math Diagnostic Test." This IEP complied with regulation in existence at that time, (34 C.F.R. § 300.346, since modified), by including "appropriate objective criteria." The criteria required a re-administration of the Woodcock-Johnson and KeyMath tests to measure progress. The U. S. District Court and the Fourth Circuit found that the proposed gain of four months after a year of special education was "wholly inadequate."

In an effort to avoid Florence County's fate, many school districts around the country now develop IEPs that include no objective measures of the child's progress. Instead of including educational goals where the child's progress is measured using objective tests and measurements, as Florence County did with Shannon, many schools now propose IEPs that rely exclusively on subjective teacher observations of the child's progress.

We'll look at Johnny, a child who has a learning disability that is manifested in the area of reading. Johnny is below grade level in reading. Instead of developing an IEP that will measure progress in reading on a specific objective test, the special education staff may come up with a goal such as: "Johnny will make measurable progress in reading, as measured by teacher observation and teacher made tests at 80% accuracy."

"Objective measurement of progress" becomes the teacher's subjective observation as to whether the child has improved in reading, writing, or arithmetic. The criteria of mastery becomes 80% of a subjective opinion. When parents object and ask for a more intense program with clear independent objective standards, they are often rebuffed or criticized.

Many school board counsel and state departments of education have advised schools to move away from using objective measurements of progress for special education children.

If you believe that the special education your child is receiving is inadequate, you must have evidence to support your position. You will find this evidence in the public school and private sector testing that has been or will be completed on your child.

After you master the material contained in this article, you will understand what the various tests and evaluations measure and how the test results are reported. You will know how to convert the scores on different tests into numbers that are easily understood. And, you will know how to measure educational progress or lack of progress, i.e. regression.

Michael

Three years ago, your eight year old son Mike began to have serious difficulties in school. By the time he reached third grade, his difficulty in reading was of great concern. His handwriting was nearly illegible and homework was a nightmare. On several occasions, you consulted with Mike's teacher about the problems he was having. Eventually, the teacher sent Mike's "case" to a special education committee. You attended a meeting of this committee --- which recommended that Mike be evaluated through the school's special education department. Relieved that something was going to be done, you consented to these battery of tests.

According to the evaluations, your son has a learning disability. In Mike's case, he has visual-perceptual problems and visual-motor problems that negatively affect his ability to read and write. Based on the results of the evaluations, your son was found eligible for special education services through his neighborhood school.

After Mike was found eligible for special education, you attended a meeting to develop his Individualized Education Program (IEP). This IEP provided for Mike to receive one period of special education in an "LD Resource" class every day. It was your understanding that Mike would receive individualized help in reading and writing from a teacher who was specially trained to remediate his learning disability problems.

Three years have passed. Mike hasn't made much progress, despite the special education help. He still has difficulty reading aloud. His spelling is poor, and his handwriting is unreadable. He is behind most of the children in his class. His attitude has changed. He is angry and depressed and says he "hates school."

When you discussed your concerns about Mike's lack of progress with his special education teacher, she reassured you that he was making progress and told you to be patient. You think that patience is not the issue; you are worried that your son will never master basic educational skills. What kind of future will he have?

At a recent IEP meeting, you reiterated your concerns about Mike's lack of progress and expressed the belief that he needs more help than he is getting in the Resource program. The committee disagreed with you. One person told you that Mike was getting all the help he needs and that he was really doing
quite well. Another committee member told you that your expectations were too high --- and that if you didn't accept Mike's limitations, you would damage him emotionally.

What should you do? You know that the time in the LD resource class with several other children is not providing Mike with the individualized help he needs. The school has not focused on teaching your son how to read, write and do arithmetic. Now, the IEP team suggests more "accommodations" and "modifications." They propose to reduce his workload, give him untimed tests, and provide him with "talking books" and a calculator. They do not propose to
give him individualized help so that he will learn to read, write, and do arithmetic.

You believe that Mike's emerging "emotional problems" are due to shame and embarrassment about not being successful in school. How can you, a parent, prove this to the staff at Mike's school so that they will develop an appropriate educational program for him? How will you know when he is getting the
help he needs?

The Process of Educational Decision-Making

Many parents erroneously assume that interpreting test data is beyond their competence and is the responsibility of the school personnel. If parents default on their responsibility and obligation to understand this information, then the interpretation of the test data is left to the school psychologist --- a person who often has very limited information about your child, aside from test scores.

The basic principles of tests and measurements are not difficult to master. As you read this article, you will see that you are already familiar with many of the concepts discussed. Statistics and statistical terms are used in many other areas of life, from business and sports to medicine. Newspaper and magazine
articles use statistics to inform readers of change or lack of change. You read articles about changes in the population, the economy --- even public opinion polls --- that include statistical information to inform you or persuade you of a point.

Parents need to expend time and effort to develop an adequate degree of expertise in statistics. You should reread parts of this article several times. Underline, make margin notes, and use a highlighter to help you master the material. Be patient and put in the time. The time you expend will help to change your child's life.

As you study this material, you will probably encounter some terms and concepts that seem confusing at first --- terms like standard deviation, standard score, and grade and age equivalents. Other concepts will be familiar --- averages, percentiles.

After you master this information, you will understand the educational and psychological tests that are administered to your child. You will be able to use this information to make wise educational decisions. You will find that your newfound knowledge and expertise exceeds that of many of the special education committee members.

When you attend your next IEP or Eligibility meeting, you will be glad you did your homework!

Katie

Katie is a fourteen year old ninth grader. She "hates school" and is failing several subjects. As a young child, Katie was bright, happy, and curious. When she entered third grade, her attitude began to change. Now, she locks herself in her room, lies on her bed, and listens to music for hours. She is sullen and angry and says she can't wait to quit school.

In desperation, Katie's parents took her to a child psychologist for testing. At a meeting to interpret the test results to Katie and her parents, the psychologist explained that Katie scored two "standard deviations" above the mean on the Similarities subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Test for Children, Third
Edition (WISC-III) and two and a half "standard deviations" below the mean on the spontaneous writing sample of the Test of Written Language, Third Edition (TOWL-III).

Test publishers are constantly updating and revising their tests. The Wechsler Intelligence test for children was originally known as the WISC. Later, it was revised and became known as the WISC-R. Several years ago, the next version was published as the WISC-III. The first Test of Written Language (TOWL) was replaced by the TOWL-II and was recently revised again.

The Woodcock Johnson battery of tests was known as the Woodcock Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery. The WJPEB included educational achievement testing and cognitive ability testing. Dr. Woodcock also produced the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test. Today, the current test series is called the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery, Revised, (WJ-R) which is an educational achievement test that includes the Test of Cognitive Abilities.

The current version of any popular test is probably in a revision status. A competitor test publishing company is probably trying to develop a new and better version of the competitor's product. This article will not focus on an analysis of each test's strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses in a current test will probably be eliminated by the next version which will be out within a couple of years.

Parents must understand that tests do not necessarily measure what they purport to measure. As you will see, a child's score on a push-up test can be represented as an overall fitness score, a measure of arm strength, an upper body measurement score, a measure of perseveration and persistence, or a measure of a child's motivation. A score may measure only one of the variables or it may accurately reflect all of the above.

To demonstrate this point, let's look at tests that measure reading ability. One test that measures a child's reading ability actually measures the child's ability to correctly read aloud and pronounce isolated words out of context, i.e., a word recognition test. The test includes a list of words, i.e., cat, tree, dog, house, person, etc. This kind of reading test does not measure true reading and may be adversely impacted by speech or word finding problems.

Another reading test measures reading by having the child read a passage of text, then answer a series of multiple choice questions about the passage. In this case, the child's score may be a measure of the child's ability to intellectually eliminate certain answers of the multiple choice format, i.e., a test of
reasoning, not true reading. Some very bright children may need to recognize and interpret only a few words to discern the total context. Other children have excellent word recognition abilities but cannot link or interpret the words in a body of text or passage. Another reading test has the child read a passage of text aloud (measuring oral reading) and then answer questions. The accuracy of the words read aloud and the child's understanding of the passage makes up the reading score.

You need to know exactly how the test was administered and what it measured.

When we first discussed Katie, we saw that she scored two "standard deviations" above the mean on the Similarities subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Test for Children, Third Edition (WISC-III) and two and a half "standard deviations" below the mean on the spontaneous writing sample of the Test of Written Language, Third Edition (TOWL-III).

Do these test scores explain the academic problems Katie is having? Do they have anything to do with her moodiness and her intense dislike of school? (Answers: Yes and Yes.) When we return to Katie's case later in this article, you will understand the significance of her test scores. You will also understand why Katie's self esteem has plummeted.

Remember: After you master the material contained in this article, you will understand and be able to interpret your child's test scores. You will be able to go back to the preceding paragraph and understand the significance of Katie's scores. You will have acquired skills that will enable you to answer questions like these:

How is your child functioning, compared with other children the same age ?
How is your child functioning, compared with others in the same grade?
How much educational progress has your child made (what has been learned) since the last test battery?
If your child is receiving special education, has the child progressed or regressed in the special education placement?
If your child has shown an increase in age and grade equivalent test scores, has the child actually fallen further behind the peer group?
And, you will learn how to incorporate objective measurements into your child's IEP so that educational progress can be charted on a regular basis.
Measuring Change: Rulers, Yardsticks and Other Tools

To clarify these points, let's change the facts. You can measure your child's physical growth with a measuring tape and a bathroom scale. You can measure growth by charting how much height increases, as measured in inches, and how much weight increases, as measured by pounds, over a period of months or years. Using these tools, you can document his physical growth. You don't need to be a doctor to understand that increases in these measurements prove that your child is growing.

Assume that your child's height was five feet, three inches last year. This year, the child is five feet, six inches tall. You can report this information in several ways. You can say that last year, your child was sixty-three inches tall and is now sixty-six inches tall. Or, you can say that your child was 5.25 feet tall and is now five and a half feet tall. You can even say that a year ago, your child was 160 centimeters tall and is now 168 centimeters tall. Or, that your child was 1.75 yards tall and is now 1.83 yards tall!

If you (or your child's pediatrician) have been measuring your child at regular intervals, you can create a chart or graph that documents changes in height or weight over time. Your child's pediatrician has "growth charts" that you can use to compare your child's growth with the growth of the "average" child.

Likewise, educational growth can be measured and charted. The yardsticks used for measurement are different, but the principles are the same. Measuring educational growth or progress is not much different from charting physical growth. Instead of a tape measure and a set of bathroom scales, you need psychological and educational achievement test results. Where will you find the information you need? How can you measure change?

Most school districts test their students on standardized group educational achievement tests at regular intervals. The results of these tests provide information about how well school districts are accomplishing their mission of educating children. The information contained in the group standardized tests can provide you with some basic information.

Standardized educational achievement tests are general measures. The information they provide is similar to that provided by medical screening tests. Medical screening tests can suggest that a problem exists. Additional testing is usually necessary before the problem can be accurately identified and a treatment plan developed. Children's learning problems can be identified in a similar manner. In most public schools, specific individual ability and achievement tests to clarify learning problems are administered by school psychologists and educational diagnosticians.

What Do Evaluations Tell You?

As you continue on your advocacy journey, you must understand the exact nature of your child's disabling condition(s). How does the disability affect her? In what areas? How serious is it? What are her strengths and weaknesses? Does she need special education? What educational issues need to
be addressed? How will you know if she is making progress? questions will be found in the evaluations and tests that are administered to children and adolescents.

Many parents erroneously believe that they cannot understand the tests. They believe that this information is beyond their ability to understand or comprehend. Usually, their reasoning goes like this:

Gosh. I'm just a parent. I didn't even finish college. I don't have any training in education or special education so I can't understand that stuff!
or

The people who did that testing on my kid went to school for years to learn how to do that. Who am I to think I can understand it? I'm not a psychologist!

If you believe that you "can't" understand your child's testing, it's time to change your beliefs. You may be reading this article because your son or daughter is performing poorly in school --- or has been identified with learning problems --- and now believes that he or she "can't" read or write or do arithmetic. Your child must confront and overcome these erroneous beliefs about learning new or difficult material. And, so must you.
 

Statistics: General Principles

Statistics are simply ways to measure things and to describe relationships between things, using numbers. Part of the confusion that many people experience when they first begin to learn statistics is because of the unfamiliar terms and concepts. As we learned in our earlier discussion about measuring physical growth, there are several different ways to report the same information (inches, feet, yards, centimeters, etc.) In the beginning, this can be confusing.

First, let's look at another familiar example that many of us deal with regularly --- how to measure our car's gas mileage. Remember: When using statistics, we can use several different terms to describe the same concepts. If you want to describe your car's gas mileage, you can make any of the following
statements:

My gas tank is half full.
My gas tank is half empty.
I am at the fifty percent mark.
My odometer shows that I have another 150 miles before the next fill-up.
My odometer shows that I have traveled 150 miles since I last filled the tank.
All of these statements accurately describe your car's consumption of gas.
With this information, you can make decisions. When will you need to buy more gas? You know that your car has a fifteen gallon gas tank. According to the gas gauge, your tank is slightly below the halfway mark. You've been driving in the city.
You'll be driving on the highway for the rest of your trip. You have used a precise amount of gas and have a precise amount of gas left in your tank. You can describe and define this information in several ways --- gallons used, gallons remaining, miles driven, miles to go, percentage full, and so forth. Using the information above, you can do some simple math calculations and learn that your car averages between seventeen to twenty-three miles to a gallon of gas, depending on driving conditions.

Using this information or data, you can also measure change. If you compare your car's present or current mileage to the mileage you obtained last month, before you had your car tuned up, you can measure miles per gallon before and after the tune-up. In this way, you can measure the impact of the tune-up on your car's gas consumption. You can also compare your car's mileage performance to that of other vehicles.

Let's look at another common way in which we use tests and measurements. When you last visited your doctor, you mentioned that you were feeling tired and sluggish. Your doctor asked several questions, then recommended that you have some lab work. After reviewing the test results, the doctor explained that your blood glucose level was moderately elevated.

To lower your blood glucose level, the doctor recommended a plan of treatment that included a special diet and a daily program of moderate exercise. After a month, you return for a follow-up visit. More lab work is completed. If your glucose level has returned to normal, it is unlikely that you will require additional treatment. But, if your glucose level remains high, despite the diet and exercise program, you may need more intensive treatment. By measuring change after an intervention and using "appropriate objective criteria and evaluation procedures," you and your doctor can make rational decisions about your medical treatment.

Remember: The principles that enable you to compute your car's gas mileage and make medical decisions will also enable you to understand educational change. When you measure educational progress (just as when you measure your gas mileage and blood levels), the test scores can be reported and
compared in several different ways.

Because educational test scores are often reported in different formats and compared in different ways, it is essential for parents and advocates to understand all of the scoring methods used in measuring and evaluating educational progress, including:

age equivalent scores (AE)
grade equivalent scores (GE)
standard scores (SS) and standard deviations (SD)
and percentile ranks (PR).
 

Knowledge about statistics will enable you to assess your child's progress or lack of progress in a particular educational program. Lack of progress is usually referred to as regression. Unfortunately, regression is a common educational problem that we will discuss in more detail later. You must learn how to recognize regression and reverse the downward spiral before your child is further damaged. Statistics: Applied

Let's turn our attention to the performance of a group of children. You must understand how an individual child scores when compared with other children who are his age or in his grade --- and what this means.

First, we will examine a single component of physical fitness in a group of elementary school students. Our group or sample consists of 100 fifth grade students. These children are enrolled in a physical fitness class to prepare them to take the President's Physical Fitness Challenge. We will assume that the average chronological age (CA) of these children is exactly ten years, zero months. (CA=10-0) The children are tested in September, at the beginning of the school year.

To qualify as "physically fit," each child must meet several goals. Push-ups are one measure of upper body strength. Each child must complete as many push-ups as possible in a period of time. Each child's raw score is the number of push-ups completed. The term raw score is simply another way of
describing the number of items correctly answered or performed.

After all of the fifth grade students complete the push-up test, their scores are listed. The results are as follows:

Half of the children completed ten push-ups or more.
Half of the children completed ten push-ups or less.
The average child completed 10 push-ups.
The average or mean number of push-ups completed by this
class of 100 fifth grade students is 10.
Half of the children scored above the mean score of 10.
Half of the children scored below the mean or average score of 10.
50 percent of the children scored 10 or above
50 percent of the children scored 10 or below.
 

As we continue to analyze the children's scores, we see patterns:
One-third of the children scored between 7 and 10 push-ups.
One-third of the class completed between 10 and 13 push-ups.
Two-thirds of the children scored between 7 to 13 push-ups.
Half of the children (50 percent) completed between 8 and 12 push-ups.
The lowest scoring child completed 1 push-up.
The highest scoring child completed 19 push-ups.

Again, two-thirds of the children in this fifth grade class were able to complete between 7 and 13 push-ups. The remaining third of the children did fewer than 7 or more than 13 push-ups. Nearly all of the children --- 98 out of 100 --- were able to complete between 4 and 16 push-ups. See sample chart below:

 

The test results provide us with a sample of data. As we analyze the data in our sample, we can compare the performance of any individual child with that of the entire group. As we make these comparisons, the data will enable us to recognize any individual child's strengths and weaknesses when compared with the peer group of similar youngsters.

If we conduct an identical push-up test with children in other grades, we can compare our original group of 100 fifth grade children with other groups of youngsters --- children who are older, younger, in different grades, in different schools. If we gather enough information or data from other sources, we can compare our original group of fifth graders --- or an individual child within our group --- to a national population of children who are being tested for their upper body strength as measured by their ability to do push-ups.


Measuring Progress: The Bell Curve

In nature, traits and characteristics distribute themselves along theoretical curves. For our purposes, the most important curve is called the normal frequency distribution or bell curve. Because the percentages of areas along the bell curve are well-known and thoroughly researched, they become our frame of reference.

By using the bell curve, we can now develop an actual diagram or graph of the children's push-up scores. This map --- on the bell curve --- provides us with additional information. We can see what percentages of children were able to complete specific numbers of push-ups. When we use the bell curve, we can visually demonstrate where any particular child scores, when compared with other children who are the same age or in the same grade. Likewise, with educational test scores, we can visually demonstrate scores and change over time.

If we compare the push-up scores obtained by children who attend different schools, we can determine whether the physical fitness of children, as measured by their ability to do push-ups, varies in different schools, neighborhoods, states, or countries.

We can also measure progress over time --- with push-ups and with improvement in reading skills. Let's look at our class of fifth graders again. We want to gather information as to whether the physical fitness class is effective --- whether the children's fitness levels improve. How can we answer this
question?

To measure the effectiveness of the fitness class, we will measure the children's number of push-ups before they take the class and compare this score with their score after they take the class. If the class is effective, we should see individual improvement and group improvement. Some children will have
minimal improvement --- these children will fall further behind the peer group. Other children who performed below their peers may show significant improvement. Some children will improve so much that they now perform as well or better than the "average" youngster.

We will measure the children's progress on one or more occasions as they progress through the class. If the fitness class is "working," that is, if the children's' fitness levels are improving, then their ability to perform fitness skills should improve measurably over time. In our example, physical fitness improvement is being assessed using "appropriate objective criteria and evaluation procedures . . ." (34 C.F.R. §300.346)

Because of its enormous usefulness in measuring educational progress, we will return to the subject of the bell curve repeatedly throughout this article.

Understanding The Bell Curve

On all bell curves, the bottom or horizontal line is called the X axis. In our sample of fifth graders, the X axis represents "number of push-ups." And, on all bell curves, the up- and- down vertical line is called the Y axis. In our sample, the Y axis represents the number of children who earned a specific score
(number of push-ups completed).
 

                                                                           



As you can see in the diagram (above), the highest point of the bell curve on the X axis equals a score of ten push-ups. You recall that more children completed ten push-ups than any other number. Thus, the highest point on this bell curve represents a score of ten. The next most frequently obtained scores were 9 and 11, followed by 8 and 12. This pattern continues out toward the extreme ends of the bell curve. In our example, the extremes occurred at 1 and 19 push-ups.

Using the bell curve, we can now chart each child's score and compare it to the score achieved by all 100 students in the class. Look at the bell curve above, and find 10 push-ups. We know that Amy completed 10 push-ups so her raw score was 10. Ten push-ups placed her squarely in the middle of the class. Half of the youngsters in Amy's class earned a score of 10 or more; half of the children scored 10 or less. If you look at the bell curve diagram (below), you see that Amy's score of 10 placed her at the 50% level. The individual's percent level is referred to as their percentile rank (PR). Amy's percentile rank
is 50 (PR=50).



   
                                                   






Erik completed thirteen push-ups. Looking at the bell curve above, you see that his score of 13 placed him at the 84th percent level. Erik's percentile rank is 84 (PR=84). Erik's ability to do push-ups placed him at the 84th position out of the 100 fifth grade children tested on our measure of upper body strength.

Sam completed seven push-ups. His raw score of 7 placed him at the (bottom) 16 percent. Sam's percentile rank was 16 (PR=16). Out of our sample of 100 fifth grade children, 84 children earned a higher score than Sam.

Larry completed 6 push-ups. We can convert his raw score of 6 to a percentile rank of 9 (PR=9). 91 children scored higher and 8 children scored lower than Larry in upper body strength as measured by the ability to do push-ups.

Oscar completed 2 push-ups. His raw score of 2 placed him in the bottom 1 percent of fifth graders tested (PR=1).

Nancy's raw score of 17 placed her at the upper 99 percent. We say that Nancy scored at the 99th percentile rank (PR=99).

You can see the relationship between the number of push-ups completed and the child's percentile rank (PR) reproduced in the table below:

PUSH-UP SCORES AND PERCENTILE RANKS

Push-ups Percentile Rank Push-ups Percentile Rank
19 99 9 37
18 99 8 25
17 99 7 16
16 98 6 9
15 95 5 5
14 91 4 2
13 84 3 1
12 75 2 1
11 63 1 1
10 50


The bell curve is a powerful tool. When you use the bell curve, you can objectively compare any child's percentile rank to that of a group of children. You can also compare a single child's progress or regression when compared to the group.

Using the bell curve, you can compare a single child's score to the scores obtained by other children who are older or younger or in different grades.

Let's see how this works. Again, we will measure the children's upper body strength by the number of push-ups they can perform. In this case, we decide to evaluate all children in all the elementary grades, from Kindergarten through fifth grade. We will assume that the average chronological age of these elementary school children is exactly eight years (CA=8-0 years).

After we test the third graders, we find that the average or mean score of our sample of 100 eight year old third graders is 6 push-ups. This means that the "average" third grade child (who is 8 years old) can do 6 push-ups. We can also compare an individual child's score on arithmetic problems answered correctly with the average number answered correctly by children the same age.

How can we compare children from different groups? Let's look at Larry who was a member of our original group of fifth graders. Although the average fifth grader performed 10 push-ups, Larry only completed 6 push-ups. His raw score of 6 converts to a percentile rank of nine (PR=9).

When we compare Larry's performance to all elementary school students, we learn that Larry (a fifth grader) is functioning at the level of the average third grader --- who is also eight years old --- in the ability to do push-ups. Therefore, we see that Larry's age equivalent score is 8 years (AE=8-0) and his grade equivalent score is at the third grade level (GE=3-0).


Fifth Grade Students: Push Up ScoresChild's Name Raw Score Percentile Rank
Oscar     3     1
Larry      6      9
Sam       7     16
Amy      10     50
Erik       13     84
Frank     15    95
Nancy    17    99


Look at the table above and find Amy. At the time of testing, Amy was 10-0 years old and in the fifth grade. She scored at the mean for her peers, i.e., 10 push-ups. Her grade equivalent score was fifth grade (GE=5-0) and her age equivalent score was 10.0 years (AE=10-0). If we tested a 20 year old person and found that this person was able to do 10 push-ups, then the 20 year old has an age equivalent score of 10-0 and a grade
equivalent score of 5.0, i.e., the same score as Amy.

Look again at the table of scores above and find Frank's name. You see that Frank earned a raw score of 15 push-ups which converts to a percentile rank of 95 (PR=95). Frank's score looks great --- until we remember that Frank was "held back" three times. Although he is in the fifth grade, Frank is 13 years old!

With this new information, let's take another look at Franks' performance. The average score for 8th graders (who are 13 years old) is 15. Frank scored 15. Frank had a grade equivalent score of 8th grade (GE = 8.0) and an age equivalent score of 13 years (AE = 13-0). When we compare Frank with other children in his expected grade, we see that his achievement is in the average range. Frank is in the 95th percentile level when
compared to fifth graders, not when compared to eighth graders.

Frank's case brings up some additional questions. Frank (age 13) was included in our sample of 5 th graders who had an average age of 10. When compared to this group of children who were younger than him, Frank scored at the 95% percentile rank (PR) level. Question: If we compare Frank's performance to that of children who are three years younger than him, will this comparison provide us with an accurate picture of his physical fitness? Answer: No.

In Frank's case, statistics inform us of two facts. First, we see that Frank performs at a superior level when compared with other children in his grade. Second, we see that he performs at an average level when compared with children who are his age.

When you evaluate the significance of data from tests, you must know how the scores are being reported. Test scores can be reported using percentile ranks, age equivalents, grade equivalents, raw scores, scale scores, subtest scores, or standard scores.

Remember: Although Frank's performance was superior for his grade, it was average for his age. If you did not know Frank's age and grade, you would have been misled as to Frank's actual achievement. But --- if Frank was an 8 year old 3rd grader, his scores would be in the superior range, using both age equivalent and grade equivalent measures.

The number of push-ups each child completed was his or her raw score. Let's assume that we want to obtain an overall fitness score. To obtain an overall or composite score, we will measure three skills (sit-ups, push-ups, a timed 50 yard dash) and obtain scores on each of these skills. In educational testing, the child's overall score (in reading, math, etc.) is often a composite of several subtest scores.

Next, we will develop a weighting system that will convert each child's raw score to a scale score. After we convert the raw scores to scale scores, we will be able to compare each of the three scores to each other (number of push-ups, number of sit-ups, seconds to complete the 50 yard dash). How do we convert raw scores into scale scores?

One way to convert scores is by developing a rank order system. In rank order scoring, the child who scores highest in an event (most push-ups, most sit-ups, fastest run) receives a scale score of 100; the lowest receives a score of 1. The other 98 children receive their respective "rank" as their scale score.

After each child's raw scores are converted to scale scores, we can easily compare an individual child to the group and to all children who are the same age or in the same grade. We can also compare an individual child's performance at different times, i.e. before and after completing the fitness course. Was the child able to do significantly more push-ups after taking the fitness course? Was the child reading better after receiving
reading remediation?

Composite Scores

You can see that after we develop a global composite score, the individual child's raw scores on each of the three fitness subtests have less significance. This is exactly what happens with educational achievement and psychological tests. Most educational tests are composed of several subtests; the subtest scores are combined to develop composite scores. More about this shortly.

Let's look at how composite scores can be used and some of the problems that arise when we rely on them.

John is a member of our original group of 100 fifth graders. He has good muscular strength (he scored at the 70% PR level in push-ups and at the 78% PR in sit-ups). But, John is very slow and uncoordinated. In the 50 yard dash, he finished 2nd from the last out of the 100 children (PR=2).

How will John's composite fitness score be derived? In this example, we will average John's percentile rank scores on the three events. John's composite score is determined as follows: Add the percentile ranks of each event (70 + 78 + 2 = 150), then divide this score by the number of events (3). In John's case, 150 / 3 = 50. (Note: actually it is improper to average the percentile rank scores, you must use the standard scores or scale / subtest scores.)

John's composite score is 50. This composite percentile rank score of 50 places him squarely in the "average" range. Is John an "average" child? His individual scores demonstrated a significant amount of subtest scatter. When you analyze his three subtest scores, you see that he has specific strengths and a very severe deficiency. Despite his average composite score, John is not an average child! (Note: As noted above, the proper calculation is to use the standard scores. Thus the same analysis of John's composite score by using standard scores, is calculated to a standard score of 96.5 and percentile rank of 41 --- again, John appears to be an average child).

Let's look at another example of composite scores to see how they can mislead us. Oscar was at the 1 percent level in push-ups. But when the other fitness subtests were given, Oscar was the fastest child in the class scoring at the 99% level. He was average in sit-ups, scoring at the 50% level. Oscar's composite fitness score, using percentile ranking, is 50%. Is Oscar really an average child? Would he benefit from remediation to improve his upper body strength, as measured by push-ups? Oscar also a great deal of subtest scatter, i.e., from extremely weak upper body strength to superior speed.

Subtest Scatter

When subtest scores vary a great deal, this is called subtest scatter. If significant scatter exists, this suggests that the child has areas of strength and weakness that need to be explored.

How can you determine if significant subtest scatter is present? Most subtests have a mean score of 10. Most children will score + or - 3 points away from the mean of 10, i.e. most children will score between 7 and 13.

If the mean on a subtest is 10 (and most children score between 7 and 13), then scores between 9 and 11 will represent minimal subtest scatter. Lets assume that Child A is given a test that is composed of 10 subtests. The child's scores on the 10 subtests are as follows: on 4 subtests, the child scores 10, on 3 subtests, the child scores 9, and on 3 subtests, the child scores 11. In this case, the overall composite score is 10 and
the scatter is very minimal. This child scored in the average range in all 10 subtests.

In our next example, we will assume that Child B earns 4 subtest scores of 10, 3 scores of 4, and 3 scores of 16. The child did extremely well on 3 tests, very poorly on 3 tests, and average on 4 subtests. Again, the child's composite score would be 10. Subtest scatter is the difference between the highest and lowest scores. In this case, subtest scatter would be 12 (16-4 = 12) Is this an "average" child? Because the child's scores demonstrate very significant subtest scatter, we need to know more about these weak and strong areas.

In educational situations, it is essential that parents understand the nature of the weak areas, what skills need to be learned to strengthen those areas, and how the strong areas can be used to help remediate the child's weak areas. The spread or variability between the subtest scores is called subtest scatter.

How do these concepts (composite scores and subtest scatter) relate to the information contained in your child's evaluations?

The results of educational tests given to children are often provided in composite scores. On the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Third Edition (WISC-III), three scores are usually provided --- a Verbal IQ (VIQ), a Performance IQ (PIQ), and a Full Scale IQ (FSIQ). Each of these IQs are composite scores. Both the Verbal and Performance IQ scores are composites of five different subtests, each of which measures a different area of ability. The Full Scale IQ is a composite of the Verbal and Performance scores --- which makes it a composite of ten different subtests. IQs between 90 and 110 are considered within the "average range."

If we rely on composite IQ scores, we may easily be misled -- with serious consequences. Katie is the 14 year old youngster whose situation was outlined earlier in this article. On the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III, Katie achieved a Full Scale IQ of 101. If the only number you had was her Full Scale IQ score, you would probably assume that her IQ of 101 placed her squarely in the "average range" of intellectual functioning.
Is Katie an "average" child?

Remember: The Full Scale IQ score is actually a "composite" of you learn that Katie's Verbal IQ is 114 and her Performance IQ is 86. IQ scores between 110 and 90 are considered "average." You see that there is a 28 point difference between Katie's Verbal and Performance IQ scores. If you did not have these additional two IQ scores, you might view Katie as an "average" child but you would be mistaken.

Katie's Verbal IQ of 114 translates into a percentile rank of 82 (PR=82). Her Performance IQ of 86 converts to a percentile rank of 18 (PR = 18). We see that Katie has a percentile rank fluctuation of 64 points (82-18=64) between her verbal and performance abilities. We will look at more of Katie's test scores shortly.

One of the commonly administered individual educational achievement tests is the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised (WJ-R). The Woodcock-Johnson consists of a number of mandatory and optional subtests. The results obtained by the child on these different subtests are combined into composite or cluster scores. If we rely on composite or cluster scores, without examining the child's scores on the individual subtests, we can easily overlook obvious deficiencies and significant strengths. Relying on composite or 'cluster' scores can lead to faulty educational decision-making, having tragic consequences for children. To advocate effectively, parents must obtain all of the subtest scores on the tests that have been administered on their child.

When Apparent Progress Means Actual Regression

One serious concern that many parents have relates to the belief that their child is not making adequate progress in a special education program. How can parents determine if their perception is accurate? And, how can parents persuade school officials that the special education program being provided to the child needs to be strengthened?

Earlier in this article, we discussed how statistics can be used in medical treatment planning. We demonstrated how a medical problem was identified and the efficacy of treatment measured, using objective tests. In our example, the patient had pre- and post- testing as a means to determine whether or not the intervention was working. Based on the results of new testing, more medical decisions would be made --- to continue, terminate or change the treatment plan.

This practice of measuring change, called pre- and post- testing, has great relevance to educational planning. After the child's performance level is identified, we can re- test the child later to measure progress, regression, or whether the child is maintaining the same position within the group.

In this way, pre- and post- testing enables us to measure educational benefit (or lack of educational benefit). Using the scores obtained from pre- and post- testing, we can create graphs to visually demonstrate the child's progress or lack of progress in an academic area.

To see how this works, let's revisit our fifth grade fitness class. According to our earlier testing in September, Erik completed 13 push-ups which placed him in the top 84 percent of all youngsters in his class. After a year of fitness training, all of the fifth grade children were re-tested. When Erik was re-tested, he completed 14 push-ups.

Question: Has Erik progressed?
Answer: Yes and no.

The average performance of the fifth grade class improved by 2 push-ups (from an average raw score of 10 to an average raw score of 12). Erik's raw score increased by 1 push-up, from 13 to 14. So, we see that although Erik's age equivalent and grade equivalent scores increased slightly from the prior testing, his actual position in the group dropped from the 84 th to about the 75 th percentile level. While still ahead of his peers, Erik did regress.
 

What about Sam? Sam's push-up performance also improved, from a raw score of 7 to a raw score of 8. Although Sam's age equivalent and grade equivalent scores increased slightly, he also regressed. According to the new scores, his percentile rank dropped from the 16 percentile to about the 9 th percentile rank. Sam is continuing to fall further behind his peer group.

Let's assume that we test Sam again when he re-enters school in the fall. Now, we have three sets of test data (beginning 5 th grade, end 5 th grade, beginning 6 th grade). Has Sam's score changed? If his percentile rank continues to drop, Sam is experiencing regression. We need toknow how long will it take for Sam to recoup the skills he lost during the summer. Regression and recoupment are primary issues in determining
the child's legal need for extended school year services (ESY) during the summer.

Norm Referenced versus Criterion Referenced Tests

Most standardized tests are either norm referenced or criterion referenced.

When we evaluated our sample group of fifth graders, we compared each child's performance to the norm group of fifth graders. Both Erik (raw score of 13, percentile rank of 84) and Sam (raw score of 7, percentile rank of 16) were referenced or compared to this norm group of fifth graders. To evaluate benefit, we looked at the norm group and the individual child's relative position in that group at the time of the first and second tests. We computed each child's change in position, i.e. progress or regression.

In our example, we also referenced the criteria of number of push-ups completed. A criterion reference analysis determines whether or not a child meets certain criteria (without reference to a norm group.) For example, at the beginning of the year, Sam completed 7 push-ups. If the criteria for success was 8 push-ups, then Sam failed to reach that goal. Let's assume that Sam received a year of physical fitness remediation; after that year, Sam completed the 8 push-ups. Does Sam now met the criteria for success? The answer to this question depends on whether the criteria have increased now that Sam is a year older.

Another factor complicates this picture. We know that Sam's' peer group completed 10 push-ups at the beginning of the year and 12 at the end of the year. Definitions of success are affected by the passage of time. If we rely on criterion referenced measures, we can be misled as to whether the child is falling further behind the peer group. We need to know exactly what the criterion is and what this means when the child is compared to a norm group.

Standard Deviation

Percentile ranks are computed by determining the mean score and the amount of variation of all scores around the mean score. Are the scores bunched around the number 10 in a tight uniform distribution? Are the scores evenly distributed? Do they peak and taper slowly in our earlier bell curves, or do they bunch at the ends, without any scores in the middle? In other words, is there a great variance, with the scores spread over a
wide range with two or more peaks, or is there a normal bell curve distribution of scores?

On our push-up test, most of the 5th grade children earned scores around 10 push-ups, with an even distribution above and below 10 push-ups. But, if one-half of the children completed 5 push-ups, one-fourth completed exactly 14 push-ups, and the remaining one-fourth completed 16 push-ups, then the average or mean number of push-ups would still be 10. One-half of the children would have scored above 10 and one-half below 10.

In this case, the distribution is not evenly distributed in a smooth curve above and below the score of 10. In fact, the variance is very large and would present a highly unusual curve with a peak at 5, a drop to zero between 6 and 13, then a jump at 14, a drop at 15, another jump at 16. This distribution of scores would not present a normal bell curve distribution. Educational and psychological tests are designed to present normal bell curve distributions with predictable patterns of scores.

We simply need to know the mean and standard deviation of the test. In most educational and psychological tests, the mean is 100 and the standard deviation is 15. (Mean = 100, SD = 15) In most subtests, the mean is 10 and the standard deviation is 3. (Mean = 10, SD = 3) Average scores do not deviate far from the mean. As scores fall significantly above or below the mean, they are referred to as being a certain value or distance from the mean, e.g., 1 or 2 standard deviations from the mean.

In all tests, the mean is at 0 (zero) standard deviations from the mean. The next marker on the bell curve is +1 and -1 standard deviations from the mean, followed by 2 standard deviations from the mean. To interpret your child's test scores, you will need to know the test instrument's mean score and standard deviation score.

Using our original push-up example, the mean score was 10 push-ups and the standard deviation (SD) was 3 push-ups. This push-up example is identical to the subtest scores in almost all standardized educational and psychological testing.

REMEMBER: With most subtest scores, the mean is 10, and the standard deviation is 3.

One standard deviation above the mean is 10 plus 3, i.e. 10 + 3 = 13. One standard deviation below the mean is 10 minus 3; i.e. 10 - 3 = 7. One standard deviation above the mean always falls at the 84 percent level (PR = 84); one standard deviation below the mean is always at the 16 percent level (PR = 16). Two SD's above the mean is always at the 98 percent level (PR = 98); and two SD's below the mean are always at the 2 percent level (PR = 2).

                                                               



Looking at actual test scores, we may see that the child scored "one standard deviation below the mean" on a particular test or subtest If the score is one standard deviation below the mean, then the child's percentile rank is 16.

REMEMBER: The subtest scores of most tests used with our children have a mean of 10 and standard deviation of 3. If a child scores 7 on a subtest, this means that the child scored at the 16 th percentile. A subtest score of 13 means that the child scored at the 84 th percentile.

Standard Scores

One of the most difficult concepts for most parents to grasp is that of standard scores. Since many educational test scores
are given in standard scores, it is essential for parents to understand what they mean.

At an IEP meeting, a parent may be told that the child earned a standard score of 85 in one area, a standard score of 70 in another area. Most parents are relieved when they get this news --- because they believe that these numbers are similar to grades with 100 as the top score and 0 as the lowest. This is absolutely incorrect! Standard scores are NOT like grades.

In standard scores, the average score or mean is 100, with a standard deviation of 15. The average child will earn a standard score of 100. If a child scores 1 standard deviation above the mean, the standard score is 100 plus 15; i.e. 100 + 15 = 115. If the child scores 1 standard deviation below the mean, this is 100 minus 15, i.e. 100 - 15 = 85.

Since a standard score of 115 is 1 standard deviation above the mean, it is always at the 84 percent level. Since a standard score of 85 is 1 standard deviation below the mean, it is always at the 16 percent level. A standard score of 130 (+2 SD) is always at the 98 percent level. A standard score of 70 (-2 SD) is always at the 2 percent level.

Remember Katie? Earlier, we learned that on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale, Katie earned a Full Scale IQ of 101. Later, we saw that this score was misleading because Katie's Verbal IQ score was 114 while her Performance IQ score was 86. The psychologist found that Katie scored 2 standard deviations above the mean on the Similarities subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd Revision (WISC-III). What does this mean?

You are learning that a score of 2 standard deviations above being measured. Since the Similarities subtest of the WISC-III measures intellectual reasoning power, Katie's intellectual reasoning power is at the 98 percent level.

The psychologist also found that Katie had a standard score of the spontaneous writing sample of the Test of Written Language (TOWL-III). Two SD's below the mean is at the two percent level. With your new knowledge, you know that Katie's ability to produce spontaneous writing samples was actually lower than the one percent level.

When we first introduced Katie, we posed two questions:

1. Do these two test scores help to explain the academic problems Katie is having?

2. Do her test scores tell us anything about her moodiness and her intense dislike of school?

Katie's intellectual reasoning ability places her at the top 98 percent of all youngsters her age. However, her ability to convey her thoughts in writing is below the one percent level. If Katie is very bright but is unable to convey her knowledge to her teachers on written assignments and tests, would you expect her to feel frustrated and stupid? Do you question why, after years of frustration, Katie is angry, depressed and now wants to quit school?

Wrightslaw Rules

All educational and psychological tests that report scores using percentile ranks or standard scores are based on the bell curve. To interpret the tests results, you should know the mean and the standard deviation. The Wechsler, Woodcock-Johnson, Kaufmann, and most other standardized tests use this format.

Since most educational and psychological tests use standard scores (SS) with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, a standard score of 100 is at the 50% percentile rank (PR) level. A standard scores of 85 is at the 16 % PR level. A standard score of 115 is at the 84% PR level. Most educational and psychological tests use subtest scores with a mean of 10 and standard deviation of 3. A subtest score of 10 is at the 50% PR level. Subtest scores of 7 and 13 are at the 16% and 84% PR levels. One half of all children fall above and one half of all children fall below the mean of 50% which is also represented as a standard score of 100. A standard score of 100 = PR 50. Two-thirds of all children are between + 1 and - 1 standard deviations from the mean.   Two-thirds of all children are between the 16% and 84% percentile ranks. (84 minus 16 = 68)
A standard deviation of -1 is at the 16% level. Zero is at the 50% level. +1 SD is at the 84% level.A standard score of 85 is at the 16% level; a SS of 100 is at the 50% level; a SS of 115 is at the 84% level.  A standard deviation of -2 is at the 2% level. A SD of +2 is at the 98% level. A standard score of 70 is at the 2% level. A standard score of 130 is at the 98% level.A standard score of 90 is at the 25% level. A standard score of 110 is at the 75% level.

One half of all children fall between the 75% level and 25% level. (75-25 = 50)
 

One half of all children achieve standard scores between 90 to 110.

A percentile rank score between 25% and 75% is the same as a standard score of between 90 to 110 --- and are usually considered to be within the "average range."

Understanding Test Data

The results of most educational tests are reported using standard scores. Parents must know how to convert standard scores into percentile ranks. Using the table below and bell curve above, you can convert any standard score into a percentile rank score. The earlier push-up example used standard educational scores. See sample chart below:

Standard Score    Subtest Score    %Rank    StandardScore    Subtest Score    %Rank  Standard Score  SubtestScore    %Rank    Standard Score    Subtest Score    %Rank
145                     19             >99             107                                68             97                             42                 87                               19
140                     18             >99             106                                66             96                             39                 86                               18
135                     17               99             105               11             63             95               9            37                 85                7             16
130                     16               98             104                                61             94                             34                 80                6               9
125                     15               95             103                                58             93                             32                 75                5               5
120                     14               91             102                                55             92                             30                 70                4               2
115                     13               84             101                                53             91                             27                 65                3               1
110                     12               75             100                                50             90               8            25                 60                2              <1
109                     73               99                                                   47             89                             23                 55                1              >1
108                     70               98                                                   45             88                             21


Other Tests: Means and Standard Deviations

Adding to the confusion about tests is the fact that test scores are sometimes reported differently. For example, test scores may be reported as "Z Scores." Z scores are simply standard deviation scores of one with a mean of zero (Mean = 0, SD = 1, instead of a mean of 100 and SD of 15 as we found with standard scores).

If you know that a particular child earned a Z score of -1, then you also know that the child's score was one standard deviation below the mean, which is a percentile rank of 16. If you convert this score, using the standard score format with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, you will see that a z score of -1 is the same as a standard score of 85.

Another test format uses T Scores. With T scores, the mean is 50 and each unit of standard deviation is equal to 10. A T score of 60 is the same as a Z score of +1. A T score of 60 and a Z score of +1 are equal to a percentile rank of 84. A T score of 70 is equal to a Z score of +2, a standard score of 130, and a percentile rank of 98.

Another measure is a Stanine test. In Stanine tests, the mean is five and the standard deviation is 2.

Specific Tests

Since tests are always in a state of change with new versions being produced, we will not attempt to review and describe each test. There are a number of parent-oriented publications that you can refer to. Interested people may ask the examiner to photocopy relevant portions of the manual for you. Examiners cannot copy actual test questions for you, but may be able to copy the instructions and explanations. This is your best source of current test information.

Earlier in this article, you learned that both the Verbal and Performance IQ scores are actually composites or averages of five different subtests. Each of the separate subtests measures very different abilities. Let's analyze Katie's subtest scores to see what else we can learn from them.


Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Third Edition (WISC-III)

Verbal Subtests Performance Subtests
Information 10             Picture Completion 6
Similarities 16             Coding 4
Arithmetic 11              Picture Arrangement 10
Vocabulary 13            Block Design 12
Comprehension 12     Object Assembly 7
(Digit Span) 8             (Symbol Search) 6
Verbal IQ = 114
Performance IQ = 86
FULL SCALE IQ = 101


Subtests of the Wechsler Intelligence range from a low score of 1 to a maximum score of 19. As you learned earlier, these subtests have a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. A subtest score of 7 is one standard deviation below the mean (-1 SD) which is the same as a percentile rank of 16 (PR = 16). You can also convert the subtest score of 7 into a standard score of 85 which has a percentile rank of 16.

When we discussed subtest scatter, we saw that variation among subtest scores is a valuable source of information. Look at Katie's subtest scores. She has significant scatter, from a high score of 16 on Similarities (98 percentile) to a low score of 4 (2 percentile) on Coding.

As a parent, you need to understand what the various subtests measure. When we discussed Katie's test scores, you learned that Similarities subtest is highly correlated with abstract reasoning. The Coding subtest measures visual- perceptual
mechanics. The Coding subtest is highly correlated with
reading achievement but has little relation to abstract reasoning.


Question: Which Wechsler subtest is most closely correlated to intellectual horsepower and reasoning ability?
Answer: The Similarities subtest.

Question: Which subtest measures a child's ability to decode visual symbols?

Answer: The Coding subtest measures decoding of visual symbols.


The Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. describes each WISC-III subtest as follows:

Information: factual knowledge, long-term memory, recall. Similarities: abstract reasoning, verbal categories and concepts.

Arithmetic: attention and concentration, numerical reasoning.

Vocabulary: language development, word knowledge, verbal fluency.

Comprehension: social and practical judgment, common sense.

Digit Span: short-term auditory memory, concentration.

Picture Completion: alertness to detail, visual discrimination.

Coding: visual-motor coordination, speed, concentration.

Picture Arrangement: planning, logical thinking, social

Block Design: spatial analysis, abstract visual problem-solving.

Object Assembly: visual analysis and construction of objects.

Symbol Search: visual-motor quickness, concentration, persistence.

Mazes: fine motor coordination, planning, following directions.

intelligence testing usually includes a measure of a visual motor speed (as in the Coding subtest) and a measure of intellectual reasoning ability (as in the Similarities subtest). To develop an accurate picture of your child's strengths and weaknesses, you need to understand what the various subtests actually measure. When subtest scores are in parentheses, this means that these score. If you look at Katie's scores, you will see that (Digit Span) and (Symbol Search) are in parentheses. On the WISC-III, the Digit Span, SymbolSearch and Mazes subtest scores are not included in the Verbal, Performance and Full Scale IQ scores. They are used to develop other composite scores.

More than half of all children with disabilities served under the special education law have learning disabilities and/or an attention deficit disorder. The most commonly administered tests fall under three categories: intellectual; educational; and projective personality tests.

In most cases, the intelligence test given is the WISC-III and/or the Stanford-Binet. Specific training and education is required before a test publisher will allow a diagnostician to administer the WISC-III. The Woodcock Test of Cognitive Abilities measures specific cognitive areas. This test may be administered by an educational diagnostician and does not require the same high level of training and certification to administer.

Other Tests

The National Information Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities (NICHCY) has published a comprehensive free article entitled "Assessing Children for the Presence of a Disability" by Betsy B. Waterman, Ph.D. It is recommended that parents read this article to further their understanding of the assessment process.

In an issue of The International (Orton) Dyslexia Society's newsletter Perspectives, Dr. Jane Fell Greene was asked about the proper tests to use with dyslexic and learning disabled children.

Dyslexia is difficulty with language. Dyslexics experience problems in psycholinguistic processing. They have difficulty translating language to thought (reading or listening), or thought to language (writing or speaking). Although psychological, behavioral, emotional or social problems may result from dyslexia, they do not cause dyslexia. One test is inadequate: a battery is required. Typical psychoeducational tests were not designed to identify dyslexia.Dr. Greene recommended using the Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude as a global test that primarily tests verbal and non verbal language. "It measures the level at which the individual would perform if appropriate interventions were implemented (as is required by federal law)."The article recommended additional tests by age group. The tests for preschool and kindergarten were the Test of Phonological Awareness, Tests of Early Written Language, Test of Early Reading Ability, and the Preschool Evaluation Scale.

For primary years, the following were recommended -

Test of Phonological Awareness, Test of Language Development,
Peabody Individual Achievement Tests, Gray Oral Reading Test,
PIAT Test of Written Expression, and the Wide Range
Achievement Test.

For elementary students Dr. Greene recommended -

the Test of Language Development, the Peabody
Individual Achievement Test, Gray Oral Reading Test, PIAT Test
of Written Expression and the Wide Range Achievement Test.
 

For the adolescent and adult she recommended -

the Test of
Adolescent and Adult Language, the Peabody Individual
Achievement Test, the Gray Oral Reading Test, the PIAT Test of
Written Expression and the Wide Range Achievement Test.

 

Another area of assessment involves projective personality testing. Projective personality tests help to assess the child's mental state, degree of anxiety, and areas of stress. They can be useful in showing that a child who is viewed as emotionally disturbed is actually a normal child who is intensely frustrated about educational problems. Children experience great frustration and unhappiness when they cannot succeed in school. If placed in a healthier environment where they are able to learn, many "emotional problems" disappear.

There are many other types of tests and "surveys." Children who have difficulty processing information and whose tests show great scatter may benefit from a neuropsychological evaluation. Neuropsychological evaluations include tests that assess specific neurological issues that affect learning. Other measures include surveys and questionnaires that provide norm reference data, most often about behavior, how children see themselves, and how parents and teachers view them.

REMEMBER: To fully understand your child's test scores, you must know the mean, the standard deviation, and the child's specific score on the test, reported as either a standard score or a percentile rank. After you have the standard score or percentile rank, you can derive the other score. Many test publishers also provide age equivalent and grade equivalent scores for specific raw scores.
After you master the information contained in this article, you will be able to convert test scores into easily understood numbers. You will be able to measure your child's educational progress. After you master this material, the feelings of helplessness and confusion that you have experienced at earlier school meetings will dissipate. You will become an authority in discussing your child's test score history and the significance of the data.

Private Sector Evaluations

In most of our cases, we do not rely on public school testing. Instead, we secure testing from private sector diagnosticians, child psychologists, school psychologists, and educational diagnosticians who are familiar with and able to administer a number of the multitude of tests that are available. We find that public school staff are often limited in the types of tests available for them to use and are unable to probe adequately, despite unusual scatter in a subtest profile.

Many private diagnosticians are eager to help parents learn how to chart out the child's test history. Assume that your child was tested three years ago on the WJ-R Test and scored at the 10% level in word identification, at the 60% level in passage comprehension and had a global composite reading score of 35%. After three year of special education where the child was presumably receiving remediation in reading, the child is retested privately. Subsequent testing by the expert discloses reading score of 25%. Technically, the earlier composite scores of 35% and 25% fall within the "average range." If you prepare a
chart that demonstrates this regression, you may be able to convince school personnel to add true reading remediation to

Individualized Education Programs

You should also obtain our book Wrightslaw: Special Education Law. The book (available from the Wrightslaw store and by fax and mail) contains the complete federal statute (IDEA-97), the federal special education regulations, and Appendix A, the appendix that explains IEPs.

You should also obtain the special education regulations from your State Department of Education. The language in the State's publication should be similar to the Federal Regulations.

By using this article and our law book, you will be able to write IEP's that contain measurable objectives.

For example, in an IEP that includes keyboarding, a typical public school IEP will measure typing success by using "teacher observation" at an 80 percent success rate. Your IEP will state that by December, 1996, on a five minute timed typing test of text, your child will be able to type at fifteen words per minute with one minute deducted for each error. By June, 1997, on a five minute timed typing test of text, your child will be able to type at thirty words per minute with five words per minute deducted for each error. This objective includes "Appropriate objective criteria and evaluation procedures and schedules, for determining, on at least an annual basis, whether the short term instructional objectives are being achieved." 34 C.F.R. Section 300.346


Parent's To Do List

1. After you complete this article, make a list of all the times when your child has been tested. Arrange your list in chronological order. Include the names, dates, and scores of each test that has been administered to your child more than
once.

2. Begin your list with the test or tests that have been administered most frequently. In many cases, that will be the Wechsler Intelligence Test and the Woodcock-Johnson and/or Kaufmann Educational Achievement Tests.

3. Write down all of the scores from the first administration of a test battery. Convert these scores to percentile ranks. Complete the same process with the most recent testing of the same battery. Compare the results. You should be able to determine whether your child is being remediated (catching up), staying in the same position, or falling further behind the peer group.

4. Dig for the standard scores or percentile rank scores in your child's file. You may find that some scores are only reported in "ranges" (i.e., high- average, low-average) or in grade equivalent or age equivalent scores. If the standard scores are not available, you should ask for them. When you request the data in standard score format, the school staff may be surprised but they should be able to comply with your request.

5. Take the most glaring deficiencies where your child has shown minimal progress or even regression and chart out the test results. If you do not have a computer, use graph paper. Software programs like Excel and PowerPoint allow for dramatic visual presentations of test data. If this is too difficult or confusing, consult with an expert. Gather your material --- your bell curve chart and standard score / percentile rank chart, your list of test scores, and your child's evaluations, and consult with a private sector psychologist or educational diagnostician who can explain the significance of the scores using percentile ranks.

6. Ask the professional to use the bell curve chart that includes standard scores, standard deviations and percentile ranks. Be sure that you have a photocopy of the bell curve so you can take it home to study. If the professional is willing, it may be helpful to tape record this portion of the session so that you can go back over it at home with the test scores in front of you.

7. Contact your state's Department of Education and request all information.
Return to Top
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

How to Disagree with the IEP Team Without Starting World War III

Many parents have questions about what to do when they are presented with an IEP that is not appropriate for their child.

You should advise the IEP team that you don’t think the IEP is appropriate, that it does not provide your child with enough help or the right kind of help. You should use facts to support your position (i.e., facts from an evaluation of your child from a private sector evaluator, graphs of your child's test scores).

Be polite but firm.

Tip: Think how Miss Manners handles difficult situations and use this idea to guide you.

Your Consent to Implement Inappropriate IEP.

When the team asks you to sign consent to the IEP, pick up a ball point pen and put the IEP on a hard table top. Write this statement on the IEP: "I consent to this IEP being implemented but I object to it for the reasons stated during the meeting."

Sign your name.

Do not be surprised if someone gets upset and claims that you are not allowed to write on the IEP because it is a legal document. This is not true - you can write on your child's IEP (although the person who objects may not know this).

You are a member of the team and a participant in the IEP process. The law requires you to make your objections clear. The IEP is the best document to use when you need to make your objections clear.

If someone tries to stop you, continue to write. If someone tries to pull the IEP out of your hands, press down hard with your ballpoint pen and continue to write. If someone yanks the document away from you, continue to write as the IEP tears.

Stay calm. Take your copy of the IEP (whatever is left), stand, say "Thank you. I guess this meeting is over." Extend your hand to shake theirs. Pick up your tape recorder and leave.

The IEP team has a problem. You have advised them in writing that their proposed program is not appropriate for your child. You also consented to their implementing the program so they should implement it.

When to Tape-record Meetings - and Why

If you expect a dispute or disagreement, you should tape record meetings. The recorder should be out in the open.

Your Thank You Letter

When you get home, write a nice thank you letter to the head or leader of the IEP team.

Re-state your position: You consented to the school implementing the IEP because something is better than nothing. You believe that an inadequate program is better than no program. However, you believe the proposed program is not appropriate for your child. Because something is better than nothing, you expect the district to implement the program -- even though Mr. Jones ripped the IEP document.

After you mail this letter, transcribe your tape of the IEP meeting.

Under these circumstances, the district will want to avoid a due process hearing.

Rules of Adverse Assumptions

In From Emotions to Advocacy, you learn the Rules of Adverse Assumptions. You should assume that:

* A hearing will be necessary to resolve a problem,
* All school staff will testify against you,
* School staff's recollections of the facts will be completely different from yours; and, most important,
* You cannot testify!

If you cannot testify, how can you tell your story? You tell your story with the tape, transcript of the meeting, your letter, and the ripped paper. Good evidence.

This happened in more than one of my cases. In one case, the special education supervisor yelled that the IEP was a "legal document," the parent was not allowed to write on it, then ripped the IEP when the parent tried to write her objections on the IEP document.

That case settled quickly. These are good strategies to use if you disagree with an IEP team and are dealing with a bully.
Return to Top
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

NEW IDEA 2004-TIMELINES by: Randy Chapman

Evaluations, Eligibility Determination:

1. Initial Evaluation Timeline. The IDEA 2004 has a new 60-day timeline in which the initial evaluation to determine whether a child has a disability and is eligible for IDEA services must be completed. Once the parent has consented for the evaluation, that evaluation to determine eligibility for IDEA services must be completed within 60 days, unless the state education agency (SEA) has a different timeframe. In the IDEA 97, there was not a specific time frame. (614(a)(1)(C)(i)(I)).

2. What if No Parental Consent? There is a new section on what should be done if parental consent for assessment is not obtained. If the parent does not provide consent the local education agency (LEA) may use the due process procedures to obtain the initial evaluation. But if the parent refuses to consent, those procedures cannot be used by the LEA to provide services to the child. (614(a)(1)(D)(ii).

3. LEAs Not Required to Use Severe Discrepancy Standard for Students with Learning Disabilities. For students with learning disabilities, LEAs are not required to consider whether the student has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning. To determine whether the student has a specific learning disability, the LEA may use a process that determines how the student responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation process. (614(a)(6)).

IEP Programs, IEP Team, and Educational Placements:

1. Generally, Benchmarks and Short-term Objectives No Longer Required. The IEP no longer requires benchmarks and short term objectives unless the student will take the alternate assessment aligned to alternate achievement standards. (614(d)(1)(A)(i)(cc)).

2. Measurable Annual Goals Now Must Include Functional and Academic Goals. Measurable annual goals, however, are still required on the IEP and the goals must include academic and functional goals. (614(d)(A)(i)(cc)(II). Moreover, the IEP must contain a description of how the student’s progress toward meeting the annual goals will be measured and when periodic reports on the progress the student is making on meeting the annual goals will be provided. (614(d)(1)(A)(i)(III)).

3. The IEP team must include not less than 1 regular education teacher, if the student is or may be participating in regular education. (614(d)(1)(B)(ii)). The IDEA 97 says the team must include at least one regular education teacher if the student is or may be participating in regular education.

4. Similarly, under the IDEA 2004 the IEP team must include not less than 1 special education teacher. (614(d)(1)(B)(iii)). The IDEA 97 says the team must include at least one special education teacher.

5. New Section Allowing Some IEP Team Absences. If the parents and the LEA agree that a team member’s attendance is not necessary because the member’s area of the curriculum or related services is not being discussed at the meeting, that team member will not be required to attend all or part of the IEP meeting. Similarly, a team member may be excused from the meeting if the parents and LEA consent and the team member submits a written report to the parent and the IEP team before the meeting. (614(d)(1)(C)).

6. Part C Input into Transition IEP. For children who were served under Part C Early Childhood, at the parents’ request the Part C service coordinator or other representative of the Part C system shall be invited to the initial IEP meeting to help with transition from Part C to Part B. (614(d)(1)(D)).

7. Student Transfers. There are new requirements clarifying what happens when students transfer to another LEA within the state or transfer out of state. If the student transfers to another LEA in the same state after the academic year begins, the LEA receiving the student must provide a free appropriate education to the student including services comparable to the IEP from the previous LEA until the receiving LEA adopts the previous IEP or develops a new IEP. Similarly, for a student transferring out of state after the start of the academic year, the LEA in the state receiving the student must provide services comparable to those under the previous IEP, until the LEA in the receiving state evaluates the student (if necessary), and develops a new IEP. (614(d)(1)(C)).

8. Amending the IEP. If the parents and the LEA want to change the IEP after the annual IEP meeting, the parents and LEA may agree not to convene another IEP meeting and can, instead, develop a written document to amend the IEP. (614(d)(1)(D)).

Procedural Safeguards

The IDEA 2004 has an increased emphasis on resolving disputes prior to a due process hearing. To that end, the IDEA 2004 adds requirements for a Due Process Complaint Notice, an opportunity to respond to the notice, makes Mediation Agreements legally binding, and adds a Resolution Session to be held before the Due Process Hearing.

1. Due Process Complaint Notice. To begin due process procedures either the parent or the LEA must send to the other party a Due Process Complaint Notice. The notice will have information about the dispute such as: the name of the student, the name of the school the student attends, a description of the problem, and a proposed resolution of the problem. Whoever is the non-complaining party (the LEA or the parent) has 10 days to send a response that addresses the issues in the Due Process Complaint Notice. (615 (c)(2)).

2. Mediation. Mediation can be used to resolve any dispute, including issues that occur before a Due Process Complaint Notice is filed. If the mediation resolves the complaint, then the mediation agreement is legally binding. (615(e)).

3. Resolution Session: After the Due Process Complaint Notice has been sent, the LEA must convene a meeting within 15 days with the parents and other relevant members of the IEP team to discuss resolving the complaint. The LEA may not bring an attorney to this meeting unless the parents bring an attorney. (615(f)).

4. Two Year Statute of Limitations. Complaints must be based on violations of the law that have occurred not more than 2 years before the parent or the LEA (depending on who is requesting the hearing) knew or should have known about the actions that caused the violation. (615(b)(6)(B)). 5. Ninety Day Timeline to File Civil Action. There is a new 90-day timeline to appeal the final hearing officer’s decision to state or federal district court, unless the State has another explicit timeline for filing in court. (615(i)(2)(B)).

Discipline

While maintaining the basic requirements for a Manifestation Determination Review for students with disabilities and the IDEA’s overall mandate that all students with disabilities must be provided a free appropriate public education, the IDEA 2004 makes some significant changes in the disciplinary process.

1. New Case-by-Case Determination Language. Specific language has been added that: “School personnel may consider any unique circumstances on a case-by-case basis when determining whether to order a change in placement for a child with a disability who violates a code of student conduct.” (615(k)(1)(A)). It isn’t clear what impact this may have. Under the IDEA, generally, almost all decisions relating to a student with a disability must be individualized and take into consideration unique circumstances. Perhaps the regulations implementing this new legislation will clarify the significance of this new language.

2. Removal for 10 School Days for Violations of Code of Student Conduct. This clarifies that LEAs may remove students for 10 school days to an appropriate interim alternative educational setting, another setting or suspension for violations of a “code of student conduct”. (615(k)(1)(B)).

3. Manifestation Determination Review. The entire IEP team is not always required to participate in the manifestation determination review but only the “relevant members.” The parent and the LEA make the decision as to who are the relevant members of the team. (615(k)(1)(E)). The criteria for determining if the student’s behavior was a manifestation of the student’s disability have been changed. The questions the IEP team will use to make this determination, after reviewing all relevant information in the student’s file including the IEP, teacher observations, and parent input, are:

1. “If the conduct in question was caused by, or had a direct and substantial relationship to, the child’s disability.

2. If the conduct in question was the direct result of the local education agency’s failure to implement the IEP.” (615(k)(1)(E)).

If it is determined that either of these two criteria apply to the student, then the conduct shall be determined to be a manifestation of the student’s disability.

A new section has been added to the IDEA stating what happens if the student’s behavior was a manifestation of the student’s disability. The IDEA 97 only stated what happens if the behavior was not a manifestation. In the event the behavior is determined to be a manifestation, then the IEP team should conduct a functional behavioral assessment and implement a behavior plan. If a behavior plan has been developed, it should be reviewed, and modified, if necessary. Finally, if the conduct is determined to be a manifestation of the student’s disability, the student should be returned to the placement from which the student was removed, unless the parents and the LEA agree to a new placement, or unless the situation involves “special circumstances” such as weapons, illegal drugs, or the student has inflicted “serious bodily injury” to someone. (615(k)(1)(F)(G).

4. Special Circumstances. In cases involving these “special circumstances,” a student’s removal may be extended to “45 school days, without regard to whether the behavior” is determined to be a manifestation of the student’s disability. (615(k)(1)(G)). The IDEA 97 allowed the extended removal in these special circumstances for up to 45 days, not school days. Moreover, a new criteria, “has inflicted serious bodily injury upon another person while at school, on school premises, or at a school function under the jurisdiction of a State or local education agency,” has been added as a reason for school personnel to extend a student’s removal up to 45 school days. (615(k)(1)(G)(iii)).

6. Expedited Hearing Timelines. The IDEA 2004 sets out a 20-school-day timeline for the expedited hearing to occur, and a 10-day timeline for the hearing officer to make a decision after the hearing.

7. Attorneys’ fees. A parent who wins a due process hearing may still be awarded their attorneys fees. There is a new provision in the IDEA 2004, however, that allows a local or State education agency to recover their attorneys’ fees from the attorney of a parent who files a complaint or an appeal of a hearing that is “frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, or against the attorney of a parent who continued to litigate after the litigation clearly became frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.” Additionally, a local or State education agency may also be awarded attorneys’ fees from the attorney of a parent, or against the parent if the hearing or litigation was determined to be for an “improper purpose, such as to harass, to cause unnecessary delay, or to needlessly increase the cost of the litigation.” (615(i)(3)(B)).

While, at first glance, this language is very intimidating, courts have always had the authority to order attorneys’ fees against a lawyer or party that files frivolous litigation for improper purposes.
Return to Top
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Kids! Understanding your IEP

Nine Things to look for in Your IEP

When you ask to see your IEP, it may seem confusing at first because it May have many parts and big words. It helps if you know what to look for.

Following are descriptions and explanations of the most important parts. An IEP should include all or most of these items; the specifics of your IEP will depend on your needs and circumstances.

1. A statement about your present level of educational performance.

For example, let's say that you are in the 9th grade, but you are reading at the 5th grade level. Your present level of educational performance in reading would be stated on your IEP as '5th grade.'

Your present level of performance is usually determined by achievement Test scores or by class work, such as written assignments and tests. It should be stated for each class in which you need special help or modifications.

Ask your teacher to look at your IEP with you, show you what it says about your present level of performance, and explain what the numbers mean.

What if you disagree with what your IEP says about your present levels of performance?

Tell your teacher and ask to take some more tests. You have the right to see your IEP, to have it explained to you, and to ask for changes to be made.

2. Long- term learning goals.

Your long- term learning goals, also called annual goals, should be Written as clear statements. They should spell out specific things you will accomplish by the end of the year. You need to be able to read and understand them thoroughly.

For example, let's say that the IEP team decides that you should learn How to balance a checkbook. Your IEP will include a statement something Like this: ' [YOUR NAME] will be able to balance a checkbook by the end of the year.'

Check to see that the long- term goals included in your IEP are right For you. Maybe you would like more goals written into your IEP. Maybe you believe that you can accomplish some of the goals before the end of the year, but others will take longer than a year. Tell your teacher and ask for a revision of your IEP. The more you agree with your long-term goals, the more you will want to work to achieve them.?

3. Short- term learning objectives with measurable goals.

These are like the long- term goals, except that they take less time. Short-term objectives are the small steps you take on the way to achieving your long- term goals. For example, the long- term goal, Learn How to Balance a Checkbook, might include these short- term objectives:

a. learn how to record checks in a checkbook, and

b. learn how to balance a bank statement.

Measurable goals that go along with these short- term objectives might be:

Student will record checks correctly 90 percent of the time over a three-month period. This includes recording the date of the check, the check number, the person or business it was written to, and the amount.'

Student will get the same balance on the checkbook and the bank statement 85 percent of the time over a three- month period.'

Each long-term goal included in your IEP should have several short- Term objectives with measurable goals.

4. Any special education help you will need.

You and your parents may believe that you can learn in a regular Classroom with special help. That help might come from the regular classroom teacher, or from the special education teacher. For example, maybe you would like to tape record classroom lectures so you can review them later. Or perhaps you think it would help to read written outlines of the lectures ahead of time and follow along in class. These ideas should be written into your IEP.

You have the right to make sure that your teachers follow the Instructions in your IEP. For example, if your IEP says, 'The science teacher will provide reading materials written at the 5th grade level,' then that is what should happen. If it doesn't, try reminding your teacher respectfully that this is written in your IEP. For example, you might say, 'I really need the special reading materials for science -- the ones listed in my IEP.

How soon do you think I can get them?' If the teacher still doesn't give you the materials, tell your parents or make an appointment to talk to the principal.

Some teenagers with LD don't know their rights. They just sit in the classroom and feel angry or sorry for themselves because they aren't learning anything. They know they could learn, if only their teacher would make a few changes to help them. Now that you know your rights, we hope you will use them to learn as much as you can while you're in school.

Rhoda says, 'I once attended an IEP team meeting for Sam, a 17- year- Old with LD. Sam and his mother were at the meeting. Some of the teachers started saying that Sam was lazy and didn't want to work, but I knew better. Sam had a good part-time job after school. His boss liked him very much and described him as one of the best workers he had ever hired. Also, Sam knew he wasn't lazy. He stood up for himself at the IEP meeting and told the teachers how they could change things in the classroom to help him learn.

Some of his teachers didn't want to make the changes, but Sam and his mother insisted. Sam's mother wouldn't sign the IEP until the changes were written into it, and she asked that the IEP team meet every three months to make sure the changes were being carried out.

5. Any special services you will need.

These might include speech therapy, transportation, or counseling. Gary says, 'Marietta is a 16- year- old with LD. She has a speech problem and needs to see a speech therapist every day, but she goes to a school where the speech therapist only comes once a week. So Marietta's IEP includes a written statement saying that she will receive speech therapy every day from a therapist who works in another school several blocks away. A school bus comes to get Marietta at 2:00 p.m. every day and takes her to the other school.' The law says that you have the right to special services if you need them. You have the right to as many of those services as you need, for as long as you need them. If you have to go somewhere else to get those services, you have the right to ask the school to provide transportation.

6. A statement describing how much time you will spend in the regular classroom.

The law says that students with LD should be included in the regular classroom as much as possible. If you will be in the regular classroom, your IEP should say exactly how much time you will spend there. It should say how much time you will spend in the other places you go to learn, such as the resource room or the special education classroom. The goal, written in your IEP, should be for you to spend more and more time in the regular classroom, if that is right for you. If you learn best with students who are not LD,you have the right to be educated with them.

7. Reasons why you are not receiving all of your education in the regular classroom.

If some of your learning is taking place in the special education Classroom and some in the regular classroom, your IEP should give reasons why. For example, let's say that you go to the special education classroom for math. Your IEP should explain why you can't learn math well in the regular classroom.

8. All of the people who will be responsible for making sure that your educational goals and objectives are carried out.

If you spend part of each day in the special education classroom and part in the regular classroom, your IEP should include the names of both the special education teacher and your regular classroom teachers. All of the teachers you will be working with should receive a copy of your IEP. Each of them is responsible for following the IEP requirements.

9. Goals and objectives for helping you plan for life as an adult.

Your IEP should include specific goals and objectives for helping you To prepare for life after high school. These might cover such areas as Getting a job, preparing to live on your own, and taking part in school activities that build life skills. Because these goals and objectives are related to the transition between being a student and being an adult, they are called an Individualized Transition Plan (ITP). Your ITP may be a separate document, or it may be part of your IEP. The law says that all teenagers with LD must have a written ITP by the time they are 16 years old. We believe this should happen as early as elementary school. It's never too soon to start planning for your future success. If you are younger than 16, ask for an ITP to be written for you. Make this request at your next IEP meeting.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Return to Top

Tips: How to Use IDEA 2004 to Improve Your Child's Special Education


by Wayne Steedman, Esq.

On July 1, 2005, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) went into effect.

In 10 Tips: How to Use IDEA 2004 to Improve Your Child's Special Education, you will learn how to use IDEA 2004 and the No Child Left Behind Act to ensure that the needs of children with disabilities are met, while also improving educational outcomes and results.

1. Use the Findings and Purposes in IDEA 2004 to Establish a Higher Standard for a Free, Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

In 1982, the U. S. Supreme Court issued the first decision in a special education case in Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 U. S. 176. In Rowley, the Court held that school districts did not have to provide the “best” education for disabled students but merely had to provide services so the child received “some educational benefit.” Rowley established a low standard for a “free appropriate public education” (FAPE).

When you read the Findings and Purposes of IDEA 2004, you will see that Congress raised the bar for a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

Prepare Children to Lead Productive, Independent Lives

In “Findings” of IDEA 2004 (Section 1400(c)), Congress found that “30 years of research and experience has demonstrated that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by having high expectations for such children,” educating them in the regular classroom so they can “meet developmental goals and, to the maximum extent possible, the challenging expectations that have been established for all children and be prepared to lead productive and independent adult lives, to the maximum extent possible.” (Section 1400(c)(5)(A))

Prepare Children for Employment, Independent Living – and Further Education

In “Purposes” of IDEA 2004 (Section 1400(d)), Congress describes what they intend the law to accomplish. In IDEA 2004, Congress added “further education” as a purpose of the law:

“The purposes of this title are to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment and independent living.” (Section 1400(d)(1)(A))

When Congress added “further education” to the Purposes of IDEA 2004, they established a new ou tcome for special education, an outcome that had never been identified before.

When you read in “Findings” that disabled children should be given the opportunity to meet the “challenging expectations that have been established for all children” and “improve academic achievement and functional performance… to the maximum extent possible” (Section 1400(c)(5)(E)) and you read that one Purpose of the law is to prepare children for “further education,” you are looking at a new legal standard for a free appropriate public education.

As a parent or teacher, you need to understand that when Congress reauthorized IDEA 2004, they raised the bar. To meet these new legal requirements in IDEA 2004, schools will have to use research-based instruction and provide more intensive special education services.

Meet Developmental Goals & Challenging Expectations Established for Nondisabled Children “to the Maximum Extent Possible”

While the phrase “to the maximum extent possible” was included in earlier amendments to IDEA, there is significant qualitative difference in how this phrase is used in IDEA 2004. In IDEA 1997, the phrase “to the maximum extent possible” described the need to provide disabled children with access to the general curriculum and prepare children for life after school.

In IDEA 2004, the phrase “to the maximum extent possible” describes the requirements to meet the developmental goals and challenging expectations established for nondisabled children, to prepare children with disabilities to lead independent and productive adu

lt lives, and to improve their academic achievement and functional performance. Provide Teachers with Knowledge & Skills in Scientifically Based Instructional Practices

Congress also found that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective if all school personnel who work with children with disabilities receive “high quality, intensive” professional development and training to ensure that they have “the skills and knowledge necessary to improve the academic achievement and functional performance of children with disabilities, including the use of scientifically based instructional practices, to the maximum extent possible.” (Section 1400(c)(5)(E))

2. Use IDEA 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) to Obtain a Better Individualized Education Program (IEP).

When Congress reauthorized IDEA 2004, they specifically noted the intent to coordinate IDEA 2004 with the No Child Left Behind Act. (Section 1400(c)(5)(C)) Many definitions in IDEA 2004 come directly from NCLB, including the requirements for highly qualified teachers.

A highly qualified teacher has full State certification (no waivers), holds a license to teach, and meets the State’s requirements. Special educators who teach core academic subjects must meet the highly qualified teacher requirements in NCLB and must demonstrate competence in the academic subjects they teach. (Section 1401(10))

Closing the Gap

The purpose of the No Child Left Behind Act is “to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and State academic assessments.” (20 U.S.C. 6301)

The purpose of NCLB can be accomplished “by meeting the educational needs of low-achieving students [including] children with disabilities…” and “closing the achievement gap between high- and low-performing children and “ensuring access of children to effective, scientifically based instructional strategies and challenging academic content. (Section 6301(3), Section 6301(9))

IDEA 2004 requires states to establish performance goals for children with disabilities that are the same as the state’s definition of adequate yearly progress under NCLB. (Section §1412(a)(15))

Attacking Low Expectations

Congress also found that implementation of the IDEA “has been impeded by low expectations and an insufficient focus on applying replicable research and proven methods of teaching and learning for children with disabilities.” (Section 1400(c)(5))

School personnel often assert that it is unreasonable to expect a child to achieve more than one year of academic progress in one year. School personnel assert this even more vigorously when they develop IEP goals for disabled children, goals that often reflect their low expectations.

But if a disabled child is two, three, or more academic years behind his nondisabled peers, the only way to “close the gap” is for the disabled child to make more than one year of academic progress in one year. When children with disabilities receive intensive instruction from teachers who are skilled in the use of scientifically based instruction, it is not unusual for these children to make more than one year of progress in an academic year.

Parents and teachers must learn about the requirements of NCLB and IDEA 2004 to ensure that these legal requirements are met. Although there is no private right of action under NCLB (i.e., parents cannot sue schools when they fail to meet NCLB’s requirements), the failure to meet NCLB requirements can be used as evidence that a child did not receive an appropriate education. (To learn more about No Child Left Behind and IDEA, see Wrightslaw: No Child Left Behind by Peter W. D. Wright, Pamela Darr Wright and Suzanne Whitney Heath, published by Harbor House Law Press.)

3. Include Research Based Methodology in the IEP.

Congress found that implementation of IDEA “has been impeded by the failure of schools to apply replicable research on proven methods of teaching and learning.” IDEA 2004 includes numerous references to “scientifically based instructional practices” and “research based interventions.” In describing permissible uses of federal funds, IDEA 2004 includes “providing professional development to special and regular education teachers who teach children with disabilities based on scientifically based research to improve educational instruction.” (Section 1411(e)(2)(C)(xi))

The child’s IEP must include “a statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable to be provided to the child.” (Section 1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(IV)) In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, IDEA 2004 describes a process by which the IEP team “may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research based intervention as a part of the evaluation process.” (Section §1414(b)(6)(B))

This language in IDEA 2004 creates new requirements for schools to use scientific research based instructional practices and interventions that are based on accepted, peer-reviewed research, if such research exists.

School officials often refuse to write educational methodologies into the IEP. They argue that teachers should be free to use an “eclectic approach” to educating children with disabilities, and should not be forced to use any specific methodology.

Congress rejected this practice when they reauthorized IDEA 2004.

By including frequent references to the need to use scientific, research based instruction and interventions, Congress clarified that methodology is vitally important. By requiring the child’s IEP to include “a statement of special education, related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer reviewed research …” (Section 1414(d)(1)(A)) Congress clarified that IEPs must include research-based methodology.

Including methodology in the child’s IEP will benefit the child’s parents and teachers. As participants in developing their child’s IEP, parents will benefit by having input into the instructional methods used to teach their children. The teachers who implement the IEP will benefit by having guidance from a team of professionals who are familiar with the child and who have reviewed the research to determine the interventions and instructional methods that are most likely to provide the child with educational benefit.

This is a win, win situation for all – especially for children who will benefit when they receive effective instruction from teachers who are trained in research-based instructional methods.

4. Ensure That Annual Goals are Comprehensive, Specific and Measurable.

IDEA 2004 eliminated short-term objectives and benchmarks for students with disabilities, except for those students who take alternate assessments. (Section 1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(I))

Although Congress may think they did teachers a favor by eliminating short-term objectives and benchmarks, they made teachers’ jobs more difficult. Annual goals will have to be far more comprehensive than they were under IDEA 1997.

Short Term Objectives

The problem is reminiscent of the game “Whack a Mole” where one knocks one mole down, only to have another mole appear in a different location. Since Congress eliminated short-term objectives and benchmarks, this information will now have to be included in the annual goals.

Eliminating short-term objectives creates as many problems for educators as it does for parents. Short-term objectives and benchmarks are steps that measure the child’s progress toward the annual goals in the IEP. When written correctly, short-term objectives provide teachers with a roadmap and a clear mechanism to evaluate the child’s progress.

Academic and Functional Goals Although short-term objectives and benchmarks were eliminated, under IDEA 2004 the IEP must include “measurable annual goals, including academic and functional goals.” (Section 1414(d)(1)(A)) IEP goals cannot be broad statements of what a child will accomplish in a year, but must now address the child’s academic achievement and functional performance. The IEP must specifically identify all the child’s needs, how the school will meet these needs, and how the school will measure the child’s progress objectively.

If the IEP goals are not specific and measurable and do not include academic and functional goals, the IEP is defective and open to a challenge that it denies the child a FAPE.

Parents must be vigilant. The danger is that the IEP team will propose annual goals that are not specific and measurable, do not meet the child’s academic and functional needs, and do not describe how the child’s progress will be measured.

Teachers will have to work harder and think more creatively to ensure that the annual goals address all the child’s educational needs and that the goals are written in clear, measurable language. If the IEP is based on the child’s “present levels of academic achievement and related developmental needs,” addresses the child’s academic and functional needs, and includes research validated instructional methods, the IEP should adequately address the child’s needs under IDEA 2004.

5. Use New Evaluation Procedures to Monitor Academic Progress and Progress on IEP Goals.

IDEA 2004 expanded the range of educational issues that must be evaluated and the timeframe within which these evaluations must be completed. After the parent provides consent, the school must complete the initial evaluation and determine if the child is eligible for special education services within 60 days. (Section 1414(a)(1)) Interestingly, the Act does not specify whether the required consent must be in writing. When conducting an evaluation, the school shall use “a variety of assessment tools to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information, including information provided by the parents. (Section 1414(b)(2)) The child’s academic achievement or functional performance may necessitate a reevaluation. (Section 1414(a)(2))

These references to measuring and improving the child’s academic achievement and functional performance are new in IDEA 2004. The IEP team must now consider functional, developmental and academic information in developing an IEP that provides a child with a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

School personnel often claim that grades and performance on IEP goals are separate, and that academic failure does not mean that the child was denied a FAPE. IDEA 2004 rejects this claim.

If the child is making progress on his IEP goals, but is receiving failing grades or is not making adequate progress in academic areas, this may be evidence that the child is not receiving a free appropriate public education.

To meet the threshold requirements for a FAPE, the school must ensure that the child with a disability makes adequate progress in academic achievement and functional performance, and on the IEP goals. If the child’s academic achievement and functional performance are not commensurate with the child’s progress on IEP goals, the child’s IEP needs to be revised. The parents and educators need to determine what adjustments need to be made to the child’s special education program and IEP.

6. Give Consent Only for Evaluations or Portions of the IEP to Which You Agree.

IDEA 2004 requires the school to obtain parental consent before the initial evaluation and before implementing special education services in the IEP. Although the wording of the statute changed in IDEA 2004, the substantive effect is no different for initial evaluations.

Parental Consent for the Initial Evaluation Before conducting an initial evaluation (the first assessments requested by a school when a child is suspected of having a disability), the school must obtain parental consent. (Section 1414(a)) If the parent wants the child to receive special education services, there is no reason for the parent to deny consent for the initial evaluation unless the parent prefers to obtain evaluations from a specialist in the private sector. In that case, the parent may consent to the school doing some evaluations. For example, the parent may consent to the school conducting educational evaluations and have their independent psychologist conduct the psychological evaluation.

While IDEA 2004 requires IEP teams to review evaluations provided by the parent, the team is not required to accept the findings and recommendations in private evaluations. Private evaluations can lead to problems if they are improperly done or if the individual who conducts the evaluation does not meet state requirements. (Section 1414(b)(3))

Before scheduling an evaluation by an expert in the private sector (i.e. a child psychologist, school psychologist, neuropsychologist, or educational diagnostician), the parent should carefully review the individual’s credentials. Here are some questions you need to answer:

• Does the evaluator meet state requirements to conduct the evaluation (for example, in most states a psychologist must be licensed to conduct psychological evaluations)?
• Does the school district generally accept evaluations from this evaluator?
• Is the evaluator willing to attend the eligibility or IEP meeting to explain his findings, educate the IEP team about the reasons for the recommendations and what is likely to happen if the recommendations are ignored?

If the parent refuses to consent to an initial evaluation by the school, the school may use mediation, resolution, or a due process hearing to obtain the evaluation. (Section 1414(a)(1)(D)(ii))

Parental Consent for Special Education & Related Services

The parent is also required to give consent for special education and related services. If the parent refuses to provide consent for services, the public school “shall not provide special education and related services to the child…” (Section 1414(a)(1)(D)(ii)(II)) This language represents is a significant change from IDEA 1997 which required schools to seek mediation or due process to obtain parental consent for services.

This new language may create problems for parents who want their child to receive special education and related services, but disagree with part of the IEP and/or how the school plans to provide services in the IEP. The law does not prevent parents from consenting to parts of the IEP that are acceptable, while refusing consent for those parts of the IEP with which they disagree. There is some support for this approach in the IDEA 2004 statute.

IDEA 2004 maintains the “stay put” provisions of IDEA 1997. (Section 1415(j)) Under the “stay put” provision, the child can remain in the then-current educational placement and continue to receive the same services during proceedings to challenge the IEP, unless the parents and school agree otherwise. Although there is no “then-current educational placement” when there is a dispute between parent and school over the initial IEP, the fact that the parent and school agree on some part of the IEP creates an obligation for the school to implement those parts of the IEP to which the parent provided consent.

If you want to consent to part of the IEP, here are some suggestions:

• Initial each part of the IEP to which you agree.
• Next to the signature line, write that you do not consent to any part of the IEP that you did not initial.

Think about how you want to resolve your dispute or disagreement with the school. IDEA 2004 includes additional procedures to resolve disputes. (See Tip #10) As a parent, you need to understand that the school is under no obligation to seek resolution of the dispute and is actually prohibited from doing so under IDEA 2004. (Section 1414(a)(1)(D)(ii)(II))

7. Insist that the Child’s Regular Education Teacher(s) Participate in IEP Meetings.

IDEA 2004 lists the individuals who are required members of the IEP team:

• The parents
• Not less than one regular education teacher
• Not less than one special education teacher
• An individual who can interpret the instructional implications of evaluations
• A representative of the school district who has supervisory responsibilities and is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum and agency resources. Section 1414(d)(1)(B))

Congress changed IDEA 2004 to allow members of the IEP team to be excused from attending IEP meetings, even when their area of the curriculum or related service will be discussed. As a parent, you do not have to consent to this. Before a team member can be excused, the individual must submit a written report to the IEP team and the parent must consent in writing. (Section 1414(d)(1)(C))

The demands placed on a teacher’s time are great. In the end, the time spent developing a comprehensive IEP that addresses the child’s unique needs will save time. More important, input from all the child’s teachers will benefit the child. Regardless of whether the parent consents to a regular education teacher being excused from an IEP meeting, the law still requires that at least one regular education teacher attend the meeting.

If the child receives any educational services in a regular education class or may receive educational services in a regular education class, the regular education teacher(s) should attend the IEP meeting. Although the law only requires one teacher to attend, all regular education teachers with whom the child has or will have contact should attend the IEP meetings. If the child’s teachers do not attend an IEP meeting, it is likely that important information will be missed or overlooked. Without input from the child’s teachers, other members of the IEP team, including the receiving teachers, will not understand the child’s unique needs and how to address these needs.

The parent should not consent to team members being excused from IEP meetings unless the circumstances are exceptional. If a team member’s area will be discussed, the teacher or related services provider needs to attend the meeting to provide information and answer any questions that arise.

If you encounter a problem getting the required members of your child’s team to attend the IEP meeting, write a letter to request that all of your child’s regular education teachers and related service providers attend the IEP meeting. (To learn how to write effective letters to the school, read the chapters on letter writing in Wrightslaw: From Emotions to Advocacy by Pam Wright and Pete Wright, published by Harbor House Law Press.)

8. Avoid Three-Year IEPs Like the Plague.

The three-year IEP was the dumbest idea Congress came up with when they reauthorized IDEA 2004. Determining a child’s unique academic, developmental and functional needs, developing measurable annual goals, determining how these goals will be met, how the child’s progress will be measured, and how the parents will be advised of their child’

s progress at regular intervals is difficult enough when only done once a year. Anyone who thinks that parents and school personnel can develop an IEP that will meet a disabled child’s needs for three years is ignorant about child development and education. Fortunately, three year IEPs are a pilot program that will be available in no more than 15 states. (Section 1414(d)(5)) If your state submits a proposal and is approved for the three year IEP pilot program, the IEP team must obtain your consent before they develop a three-year IEP. Do not grant consent.

Find out if your state was approved for the IEP pilot program. If your state was approved for the pilot program, you need to double-check the beginning and ending dates on any IEP for your child. Before you sign consent to implement your child’s IEP, make sure the IEP has an ending date that is no longer than twelve months after the IEP was developed.

You are not limited to one IEP meeting a year. Parents and teachers can request an IEP meeting to review and revise the child’s IEP more often than once a year. IDEA 2004 provides that the IEP team shall revise the IEP to address:

•Any lack of expected progress toward the IEP goals or in the general education curriculum
•The results of any reevaluation
•Information provided to or by the parents
•The child’s anticipated needs and
•Other matters. (Section 1414(d)(4))

9. Challenge Suspension or Expulsion if Child’s Behavior was a Manifestation of the Disability, or if the Alternate Placement Does Not Provide FAPE.

IDEA 2004 permits the school to suspend a disabled child from the current program or place the child into an interim program for up to 10 days if the child violates a “code of student conduct.” (Section 1415(k)(1)(A))

If the school wants to suspend the child for longer than 10 days, they must convene an IEP meeting to determine whether the child’s behavior is a manifestation of the child’s disability. If the school concludes that the child’s behavior was not a manifestation of the disability, the school can discipline the child in the same way and to the same extent that a nondisabled student can be disciplined. (Section 1415(k)(1)(C))

Congress also made it easier for the school to determine that the child’s behavior is not a manifestation by eliminating key elements of the manifestation determination process in IDEA 1997. IDEA 2004 does not require the IEP team to determine whether the child’s IEP and placement are appropriate. IDEA 2004 only requires the IEP team to determine whether the child’s behavior “was caused by or had a direct and substantial relationship to the child’s disability” or ” whether the behavior was the “direct result of the local education agency’s failure to implement the IEP.” (Section 1415(k)(1)(E))

This means the school could provide a child with an inappropriate special education program and placement, and could expel the child from school. There are several strategies you can use to ensure that the school does not use behavior problems as a way to deprive your child of an appropriate education.

IDEA 2004 still requires school districts to provide a free appropriate public education to all children with disabilities, including children who have been suspended or expelled from school. (Section 1414(k)(1)(D) and Section 1412(a)(1))

If the school places your child into an alternate setting, you must diligently investigate whether or not the child’s IEP is being fully implemented. If the IEP is not being implemented, you may force its implementation through the dispute resolution procedures in the law. One strategy is to challenge the IEP team’s determination that the behavior was not a manifestation of the child’s disability. Parents must only request a due process hearing if they are prepared and have a valid claim. (See Tip #10).

If you attempt to argue that the IEP and/or placement were not appropriate as the reason for the behavior being a manifestation, you may be met by a claim from the school district that your action was frivolous. Parents can certainly argue that the IEP and/or placement are not appropriate. You should also include claims that the behavior for which the child is being disciplined was caused by or had a direct and substantial relationship to the child’s disability, and/or that the child’s misbehavior was the direct result of the school’s failure to implement the IEP, if these claims are valid and you have support for them.

Under IDEA 2004, “stay put” does not apply to appeals of disciplinary decisions, so the child must remain in the alternate program until the removal period expires or until a hearing officer orders the student’s return to school.

10. Avoid Due Process Hearings if Possible.

Due process hearings should be your last resort, after you have attempted all other methods to resolve your dispute. Due process hearings are often an expensive and lengthy process. There are few absolutes in the law, and perhaps even fewer absolutes in the context of special education litigation.

The adversarial nature of due process hearings often creates a wound in the relationship between parents and school personnel that never heals.

Try to resolve your dispute through IEP meetings, mediation, and/or the Resolution Session before you request a due process hearing.

Mediation

Parents and schools can attempt to resolve their dispute through mediation. Mediation is a confidential process that allows parties to resolve disputes without litigation. The mediator helps the parties express their views and positions and understand the other’s view and positions. Before entering into mediation, you need to understand your rights and the law. When you mediate, your goals are to resolve the problems and protect the parent-school relationship.

If the dispute is resolved in mediation, IDEA 2004 requires the parties to execute a legally binding agreement that sets forth the terms of the resolution. (Section 1415(e)(2)(F))

Resolution Session

IDEA 2004 includes a new mandatory “resolution session” that provides the parties with an opportunity to resolve their dispute before the due process hearing. (Section 1415(f)(1)(B))

The school district must send “the relevant member or members of the IEP team” who have knowledge about the facts in the parents’ complaint and a school district representative who has decision-making authority. The school board attorney may not attend the Resolution Session unless an attorney accompanies the parent. The parents and school district may waive the Resolution Session or use the mediation process. If the school district has not resolved the complaint to the parents’ satisfaction within 30 days of receiving the complaint, the due process hearing can be held. (Section 1415(f)(1)(B)(ii))

Due Process Hearings If your attempts to resolve your dispute have been unsuccessful, you may decide to request a due process hearing. Consult with an attorney who is knowledgeable about this area of law first. Many of the pretrial procedures and timelines for due process hearings are new in IDEA 2004. These pretrial procedures are technical and cumbersome.

IDEA 2004 includes other disincentives for parents who file for due process. If the parents’ claim is found to be “frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation,” the parents’ attorney can be held liable for the school district’s attorney’s fees. (Section 1415(i)(3)(B)) If the parents’ complaint was filed “for any improper purpose, such as to harass, to cause unnecessary delay, or to needlessly increase the cost of litigation,” the parents can be held liable for the school district’s attorney’s fees.

Congress only envisioned shifting the school district’s attorney’s fees to parents or their attorneys in extraordinary cases. This fee shifting statutory language closely follows Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and a case from the U. S. Supreme Court (Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC, 434 U.S. 412 (1978)). Cases in which a plaintiff is forced to pay a defendant’s attorneys under Rule 11 or the Christiansburg standard are rare. (See IDEA 2004: Rule 11 and Attorneys Fees)

Parents should not be deterred from requesting a due process hearing out of fear that they may have to pay the school’s attorney’s fees, if they are filing in good faith and have a valid claim.

You should avoid a due process hearing if possible. The best way to avoid a due process hearing is to prepare for a due process hearing as soon as you realize that you have a disagreement or dispute with the school about your child’s special education program.

If you have a well-organized case and a clear, simple theme, you will be in a stronger position if you need to request a due process hearing.

You must be able to document your attempts to resolve the dispute. You must also be able to describe your concerns about the school’s proposed program or placement and your proposed solution. When you document your concerns, you make it more likely that others will understand your position and help you resolve your dispute.
Return to Top
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________