Bullying 11/09/2011
The right to be free from bullying and harassment a. Special education law as it relates to bullying is in its infancy. OCR has noted that disability harassment may result in a denial of FAPE under 504, ADA, and the IDEA. There have been some legal decisions that indicate that bullying can result in the denial of FAPE in violation of the IDEA. b. The Education Department defines disability harassment as intimidation or abusive behavior toward a student based on disability. It may not be denial of FAPE if child is making academic progress. c. Extremely fact specific: need to show that the child can derive no benefit from the services that he or she is offered by the school district, then it is a denial of FAPE. Some Michigan cases: When evaluating harassment or bullying complaint, OCR will examine the conduct of the student who was the alleged victim of the harassment to determine whether his peers’ actions were, in fact, based on the student’s disability. Ann Arbor 56 IDELR 84 The failure of a student or parent to submit a formal written complaint does not excuse a district’s duty to respond. The fact a student with a cognitive impairment never filed a written complaint against schoolmates who regularly called him “retard” and “moron” did not excuse a MI district’s failure to investigate those incidents. Williamston Community School 56 IDELR 22 (OCR 2010) A district is responsible for student-on-student harassment if it has adequate notice that such harassment based on disability is occurring and fails to take prompt and effective action to stop it, to remedy the effects of the harassment it reasonably could have prevented, and to prevent its recurrence. CASE FILE: Failure to link child's declining grades to bullying nixes FAPE claim Case name: Southmoreland Sch. Dist., 111 LRP 50995 (SEA PA 06/18/11). Ruling: An IHO determined that a Pennsylvania district did not deny FAPE to a second-grader with an SLD and a speech-language impairment whose parent reported that the student was being bullied. The parent failed to connect the four incidents in question to any educational harm. What it means: There is no clearly accepted standard regarding when bullying results in a denial of FAPE. However, the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York has stated that a student is deprived of FAPE when bullying substantially restricts learning opportunities. T.K. v. New York City Dep't of Educ., 56 IDELR 228 (E.D.N.Y. 2011). In this case, the student complained of four incidents of bullying. However, relying on T.K., a Pennsylvania IHO found insufficient evidence that the incidents, which met with an appropriate response from the district, were the cause of a decline in the student's grades. Summary: An IHO found insufficient evidence that the alleged bullying of a child with a speech-language impairment, or the district's response to the incidents, adversely impacted the child's educational program. Not only did the district respond appropriately to the parent's complaints, but there was insufficient evidence that the four incidents in question adversely affected the student's academic program. The student complained of four occurrences of bullying during the 2010-11 school year, including an incident on the bus where a student hit other students with a seatbelt buckle, and an incident in which a classmate reportedly took something from him at recess. The parent alleged that the district denied the student FAPE, pointing out that the student's grades declined. Citing a standard articulated in T.K. v. New York City Department of Education, 56 IDELR 228 (E.D.N.Y. 2011), the IHO explained that a student is deprived of FAPE when bullying reaches a level where it substantially restricts the student's learning opportunities. First, the IHO noted that the district responded properly to the incidents by investigating, disciplining the perpetrator, and separating the students, where appropriate. Second, the parent failed to link the incidents to any educational harm. "[W]hile there was some evidence that Student's grades during the third and fourth marking period . . . were not as high . . . there was little evidence to demonstrate that the decline in grades was the result of any or all of the four incidents, rather than an increased difficulty of the curriculum," the IHO wrote. The IHO pointed out that there was some dispute among the parties as to whether the incidents even rose to the level of bullying. Citing T.K., the IHO observed that although bullying usually involves unequal and coercive power, even a student's perception that he is at a disadvantage is sufficient. Moreover, the fact that the student experienced difficulties with peers, had perceived conflicts with certain peers, and did not have many friends, raised "significant red flags." The IHO advised the IEP team to consider whether, based on the IHO's findings, the student had social-emotional needs warranting additional assessment and intervention. Add Comment Independent Educational Evaluation 11/09/2011
An Independent Educational Evaluation: IEE A Child with a Disability is to receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). To determine what is “appropriate” for your child is identified in an evaluation that addresses all areas of the child’s suspected need (areas of weakness) in school which are then met by the Individualized Education Plan’s (IEP’s) terms and services. The IEP is to be designed to meet the unique needs of the child and prepare him/her for further education, employment, and independent living. The evaluation is the foundation upon which the IEP is constructed. If the evaluation foundation is faulty, the IEP is not going to enable your child to make meaningful progress in his/her education when all areas of need are not identified and addressed. For example, when a child’s disability related behavior is impacting his education because he is being made to go home, to the principal’s office, multiple suspensions, exclusion from school activities, ect. A functional behavioral assessment (FBA) is to be done. When a child has difficulties related to their disability in seeing, writing, reading, speaking, processing, organizing, ect. and assistive technology may be a service that could accommodate that disability, an Assistive Technology (AT) evaluation is to be completed. A child is to be evaluated in all areas of potential need related to his/her disability. It is helpful to have a diagnosis from a physician. School psychologists, social workers, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, special education supervisors are to be educated in their field of expertise and able to identify the areas of weaknesses and suggest possible interventions and accommodations to enable the child to make progress. However, when a parent disagrees with the evaluation, a parent of a child with a disability has the right to obtain an independent educational evaluation of the child at no cost to the parent. Process:
Friday, September 16, 2011 Introduction Goal for Today—enable those present to be aware of basic rights of Children when their disability impacts their education. Rights of Children: When disability impacts education It is as simple as A,B,C
IDEA, 504, ADA IDEA first known as Education for All Handicapped Children Why was it needed? To combat pervasive discrimination against people with disabilities, and create an affirmative set of obligations for states, schools, and school districts by first allowing Access, then to provide an IEP that benefits a child and to communicate the progress to parents. As simple as A, B, C. At the time of the acts passage—8 million children had disabilities that impacted their education, but only 3.9 million of them were getting some form of specialized educational services defining “appropriate” when personalized educational services are provided= “served” The right to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) with Maximum Appropriate Integration Historical framework: Education for All Rowley Decision IDEA revised Deal v. Hamilton Handicapped Children US Supreme Court 1997 6th Circuit Act of 1975 1982 2004 Amy Rowley—she was a deaf child and when she entered first grade, her parents requested that she have a qualified sign language interpreter in her academic classes. School refused. School refused by arguing that they: met with her parent to place her in a regular kindergarten class to determine what supplement services would be necessary to her education. Several members of the school administration prepared for Amy’s arrival by attending a course in sign language interpretation, and a teletype machine was installed in the principal’s office to facilitate communication with her parents who are also deaf. At the end of the trial period, it was determined that Amy should remain in the kindergarten class, with an FM hearing aid to amplify words for her. She successfully completed her kindergarten year. Reason: “she was achieving educationally, academically, and socially without it”. Parents—lost at due process, lost at the review, and then went to U.S. District Court (she is advancing easily from grade to grade but…. That court also found “Amy understands considerably less of what is going on in class than she would if she were not deaf and is not learning as much, or performing in as well academically, as she would without her handicap.” The court concluded that this disparity between her achievement and her potential indicated that she was not receiving a Free Appropriate Public Education what was defined by the District Court as “an opportunity to achieve her full potential commensurate with the opportunity provided to other children.” She won. School District Appealed U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court, and the School District appealed to the Supreme Court: Rowley held: Children with disabilities are entitled to access public education and receive the “basic floor of opportunity” provided by IDEA consisting of access to specialized instruction and related services which are individually designed to provide educational benefit to the child. The court pointed out though, FAPE involves access to educational opportunity only, not educational results. In Rowley: the Court ruled that, assuming a child is receiving an appropriate preschool, elementary or secondary education in the state involved AND that the education meets the standards of the state education agency, the special education and related services offered a child with disabilities must meet two additional criteria in order to constitute FAPE to be appropriate:
Meet the State’s educational standards
So now children with disabilities are in, but suffer from the discriminatory treatment of low expectations IDEA was amended in 1997, and Congress explicitly found: “the implementation of this Act has been impeded by low expectations, and an insufficient focus on applying…proven methods of teaching and learning for children with disabilities” Congress found that “education for children with disabilities can be made more effective by having high expectations ….and ensuring their access in the general curriculum to the maximum extent possible. Goal of CARE: Having and Enforcing High Expectations of Children with Disabilities We all need to raise our gaze and enable children with disabilities to flourish into who they are bent to be, so that we all succeed. “Raise up a child in the way he should go”—actually means in the way he is bent. Every precious child is bent in a certain way and it our responsibilities to nourish him/her towards that certain “bent” so that he/she can flourish. Our educational system can be utilized to do just that, but it takes involved adults to ensure that square pegs aren’t being forced into round holes. Ct. Legal Rights Project---folks in institutions that never received an education where the difference could have been between self-sufficiency or a life of dependence. As our 6th Circuit Court of Appeals pointed out in Deal v. Hamilton Board of Education “The Rowley Court did not have occasion to consider the question of what level of educational benefit the school district would have been required to provided Amy Rowley had she not been progressing successfully through school in a regular education classroom. The Court then delved further into the Congressional intent behind the Act and found there was a fiscal incentive to ensure that children receive proper education services so that they become productive citizens, not dependent upon the government for a minimally acceptable lifestyle. Congress has declared that the school personnel who work with disabled children should receive high quality professional development in order to provide such personnel with the skills necessary to “ensure that all disabled children have the skills and knowledge necessary to enable them….to be prepared to lead productive, independent, adult lives, to the maximum extent possible. Who qualifies/Who gets in? Eligibility Student with a Disability R 340.1702: “a person who is determined by an individualized education program team or a hearing officer to have 1 or more of the impairments specified in this part that necessitates special education or related services, or both, who is not more than 25 years of age, and has not graduated from high school 13 categories of disability: Autism, deaf-blindness, deafness, emotional disturbance, hearing impairments, mental retardation, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairments, other health impairment, specific learning disability, speech or language impairments, traumatic brain injury, and visual impairment including blindness. I. The right to be identified--- Rule: § 300.111 Child find. (a) General. (1) The State must have in effect policies and procedures to ensure that-- (i) All children with disabilities residing in the State, including children with disabilities who are homeless children or are wards of the State, and children with disabilities attending private schools, regardless of the severity of their disability, and who are in need of special education and related services, are identified, located, and evaluated. How to get in: Evaluation to determine eligibility II. The right to be evaluated in all suspected areas of disability which will provide information to determine the educational needs of the child.20 USC §1414(b)(3)(B).
Put in writing, sign consent, asap, 30 school days from the time that you sign for the evaluation to be completed. Note on RTI (response to interventions) Districts can and should pursue this route to see if a child will benefit from other services before looking to special education. Flows in stages 1. High quality scientifically based instruction for all children with periodic screenings for 8 weeks. Stage 2. Student not making progress and receives more intensive services not to exceed one grading period. Stage 3. Refer a child for an evaluation. USDE Office of Special Education Programs Director wrote a memo in Jan. 2011 to all state directors of special education stating : A response to Intervention (RTI) process cannot be used to delay-deny an evaluation for eligibility under IDEA.
ii. Parents were reimbursed for the cost of the therapeutic placements i. Evaluations are to be related to every area of suspected disability 34 CFR 300.304(c)(4) including: if appropriate health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance, communicative status and motor abilities. ii. (c) (3)Assessments are to be selected and administered so as best to ensure that if an assessment is administered to a child with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, the assessment results accurately reflect the child’s aptitude or achievement level or whatever other factors that the test claims to measure, rather than reflecting the child’s impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills (unless those skills are what the test is supposed to measure). 1. Example: A child who cannot speak should not be given a test that requires verbal answers to reflect his/her IQ. 2. A child who cannot see should not be given a test that requires him to visually choose and answer. Sad, but true and these children end up in the CI classroom when they are not cognitively impaired, but their disability effects their score on an intelligence test because of how the test was presented, not what it was testing for. III. All assessments must be provided and administered in the child’s mode of communication and in the form to yield the most accurate results. IV. The district must follow the proper procedures for determining eligibility and educational need. : 34 C.F.R. 300.306 (c) Procedures for determining eligibility and educational need. (1) In interpreting evaluation data for the purpose of determining if a child is a child with a disability under Sec. 300.8, and the educational needs of the child, each public agency must-- (i) Draw upon information from a variety of sources, including aptitude and achievement tests, parent input, and teacher recommendations, as well as information about the child's physical condition, social or cultural background, and adaptive behavior; and V. The right to have one’s Parents be key players in the process —20 USC 1414 (c): REED—review of existing evaluation and data, the IEP team shall review existing evaluation data on the child including i. Evaluations and information provided by the parents of the child ii. Current classroom-based local, or state assessments, and classroom-based observations; and iii. Observations by teachers and related services providers On the basis of that review, and input from the child’s parents, identify what additional data, if any are needed to determine—eligibility and the educational needs of the child (this is a new provision in 2004) Important note—when getting those expert’s opinions, some psychologist, neuropsychologists, ect., they know how to write in their letter whether or not a child needs specialized accommodations—request that they spell it out. Dr Apple, Dr. Bowker, Dr. Sloane—they do this, but it is important that others incorporate this into their practice as well. They should (since we have some practitioners here as well) suggest the areas within the 13 categories that the school evaluations should pursue. Unfortunately, I have seen where the Dr. encourages the district to find the child eligible under one label, where others may fit better in the educational context. The medical context of disability is different from the school context. If it is not effecting the child’s progress in school, then the district will not find them eligible. (ii) Ensure that information obtained from all of these sources is documented and carefully considered. (2) If a determination is made that a child has a disability and needs special education and related services, an IEP must be developed for the child in accordance with Sec. Sec. 300.320 through 300.324. VI. Right to an IEP if found that the child’s disability requires the need for special education and related services. a. What is “special education”? Specially designed instruction that makes up special education includes adapting the content, methodology or delivery of instruction to ensure a child’s access to the general curriculum, so that he or she can meet the education standards that apply to all children. b. What are “related services”? the services that are needed to enable the child access to the general curriculum. VII. Right to an effective IEP that follows the legal requirements of 34 CFR §300.320-.324 Effective for FAPE—makes a “good faith effort” to assist the child to achieve his IEP goals. a. Development of the IEP 300.324 (a). In developing the IEP the team must consider: i. The strengths of the child ii. The concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child iii. The results of the initial or most recent evaluation of the child; and iv. The academic, developmental, and functional needs of the child. b. Special Factors the team must consider: i. Behavioral issues (impedes learning or that of others)The use of positive behavioral interventions and support to address the behavior ii. Limited English iii. Blind or visually impaired=Braille iv. Communication Needs: Consider the communication needs of the child, and in the case of a child who is deaf or hard of hearing, consider the child’s language and communication needs, opportunities for direct communications with peers and professional personnel in the child’s language and communication mode, academic level, and full range of needs, including opportunities for direct instruction in the child’s language and communication mode; and v. Consider whether the child needs assistive technology devices and services 1. Assistive Technology and the IEP: As your child’s strongest advocate, you must insist that AT devices and services be included in the written IEP once the team determines that they are needed. 2. Unfortunately, you may need to bring to the table various AT solutions that you think may work for you child. How do you know what those would be? http://www.snapps4kids.com/ 3. If your district is within Kalamazoo County—go to the KRESA website, special education, assistive technology, lending lab where educators can go and utilize different devices to see what would work best for a child. You can suggest that the district do this. 4. If the team cannot determine what AT devices and services are best for your child, then a formal AT evaluation may be needed. The evaluation should be performed by a qualified professional in a timely fashion. There is a shortage of qualified AT evaluators, so if the district uses their own personnel to conduct the evaluation and you disagree with the recommendations, the parents have a right to an independent evaluation at district expense. 5. Independent Educational Evaluations—put the request in writing, the district has to either grant the request (but will often cap an amount) or object to the request and take the matter to Due Process. The district will have ____ days to complete. 6. Beware: You want evaluators that are truly independent and know how to make recommendations to the IEP team. iii. Please note that although your child may not need AT services right now, your child’s AT needs are to be continually considered as long as they have an IEP as is behavior, communication needs, ect. VIII. The Right to be involved in and progress in the general education curriculum. 34 CFR 300.320(a)(2)(i) of the 2006 regulations require that the annual goals in a child’s IEP include academic and functional goals designed to “meet the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and progress in the general education curriculum.” The goals are to relate to the areas where the evaluation indicated there is an educational need for services. At meetings reviewing the evaluation: Ask for specific points where a child’s learning processes break down, and how that impacts classroom learning. This is where you want to focus in on your goals. Sometimes the district’s evaluation will be enough to locate these specific points, but often it takes a private professional to do a comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation to find a fuller range of academic strengths and weaknesses IX. The Right to obtain regular progress reports= Communication (although benchmarks were not included as a requirement in the 2004 statute, regular progress reports are still mandated by law.) Key questions to ask at the IEP to ensure that the goals are appropriate and measurable -How will progress toward these goals be measured? -How will you monitor my child’s progress? -How will you document my child’s progress? -How will you communicate with me regarding my child’s progress? Communication breakdown—ask the team, who are are to contact to ensure that the progress is being made. When you contact them, you want to know what you are asking for so Example: sometimes goals are written in terms of grade-level attainment, which can be very confusing to us when we don’t know what the curriculum standards are. To illustrate: Danny will increase his written expression skills to the beginning fourth-grade level.” Say what? How would a parent be able to make sure that he was making progress on that—I would already feel out of the loop. Effective IEP teams would write something like this: Danny will write two to three paragraphs on a given topic, using correct mechanics (capitalization, ending punctuation), spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and organizations with the following objectives: One objective: Danny will generate his ideas in correct sequence to formulate two to three paragraphs, using and completing graphic organizers before writing. Data would be collected and then reported to the parents every quarter of how that is going. Demand Data—good data. Common method: Curriculum-Based Measurements or CBM—Dibels is an example for early reading skills to predict later reading sufficiency. Teacher observations, teacher made tests=argue insufficient. We want data that can tell us if the instructional method is effective. Without data, it is someone’s opinion—yikes! We want data that measures the progress of this individual child over time to ensure that the special education and related services are working for that child. Note on Methodology: Rowley left it up to the school to determine what is the appropriate specially designed instruction for the child, to be determined with parental involvement. Ask to have the specially designed instruction named in the IEP so that you can then track what works and what doesn’t work for your child. 34 CFR 300.39(b)(3) X. The right to be educated in the Least Restrictive Environment 34 C.F.R. 300.114 LRE Requirements (2)Each public agency must ensure that-- (a) to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities….are educated with children who are nondisabled; and (b) Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. (Data Driven) Start with the inclusion, let data drive the determination of whether the child is/isn’t making progress there with aids and services, before moving to a more restrictive placement. Checklist: Least Restrictive Environment Section 1. Whether education can be achieved satisfactorily the regular classroom for a major portion of the school day, with the use of appropriate supplementary aids and services: 1A. Steps taken by the school to try to include the child in a regular classroom in conjunction with supplementary aids and services. · Has the school considered the whole range of supplementary aids and services, including resource rooms and itinerant instruction? · Has the school made efforts to modify the regular program to accommodate the child? · Do the school's efforts constitute at least serious consideration rather than token gestures? Yes ____ ____ ____ No ____ ____ ____ 1B. Comparison between the educational benefits in the segregated setting versus those in a regular classroom with supplementary aids and services: · Does the comparison significantly include social and communication skills as well as academic progress? · With such a broad scope, would education experts favor the segregated placement in terms of relative benefits to the individual child? ____ ____ ____ ____ 1C. Possible negative effects on the education of other children in the regular classroom if the child were integrated with appropriate supplementary aides and services: · Is there a negative effect so disruptive that the education of the other students is significantly impaired? · Do the child's disabilities demand so much of the teacher's time that the teacher will be required to ignore the other students? ____ ____ ____ ____ 1D. Cost factor depending on the circumstances of the specific case: · Is the cost of the integrated placement, with appropriate supplementary aids and services, so great that it would significantly impact upon the education of the other children in the district? ____ ____ (If most of the answers to questions in Sections IA through ID are "yes,' a segregated placement may be appropriate. In that case, the proposed segregated placement should be evaluated with the questions in Section 2. If most of the Section I answers are "no, " a segregated placement probably would not be appropriate and the Section 2 questions would be irrelevant.) Section 2. Determining if the proposed placement includes the child in school programs with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate: · Is it possible to place the child in regular education for some, even if not a significant portion, academic programs? · Is it possible to place the child in regular non-academic classes? · Is it possible to provide interaction with nondisabled children during lunch and recess? Yes ____ ____ ____ No ____ ____ ____ (the more answers in Section 2 that are yes, then more likely it is that the proposed segregated placement meets the LRE criteria as defined by current policy and case law.) . However, we have far to go to utilize this law to end discrimination in public education. Example: students with disabilities continue to drop out of high school at higher rates then peers, Be disciplined at higher rates than their peers And graduate with a diploma at lower rates than their peers. Questions? Posted by Kristin at 11:36 AM 0 comments Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook Thursday, September 15, 2011 Tools to determine appropriate assessments Focus on Results article from the MI Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services Tools Help Individualized Educational Program (IEP) Teams Decide Which Assessments to Use for Students with Disabilities December 2003 http://focus.cenmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/GATA_03_05.pdf Posted by Kristin at 6:07 AM 0 comments Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook Comparing Section 504, IDEA and ADA Comparing Section 504, IDEA and ADA Section 504, IDEA, and ADA address the needs of persons with disabilities. The following table provides an overview of the components of these programs and a comparison of their policies for providing services. Component Section 504 IDEA ADA Type A Civil Rights Law An Education Act A Civil Rights Law Title The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Purpose A civil rights law that protects the rights of individuals with disabilities in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. A federal funding statute whose purpose is to provide financial aid to states in their efforts to ensure a free appropriate public education for students with disabilities. Provides a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. Responsibility General Education Special Education Public and private schools, business establishments and public buildings. (services) Funding State and local responsibility (no federal funding) State, local, and federal. IDEA funds cannot be used to serve students eligible only under Section 504. Public entities, including schools, business establishments and public accommodations. Administrator Section 504 Officer (school systems with 15 plus employees) to coordinate efforts to comply with this law. Special education director or designee. ADA Officer is required to coordinate efforts to comply with this law. Service Mechanism Individualized Service Plan (ISP). Accommodations and/or related aids and services, including the services of special educators and related service professionals, when the student does not otherwise qualify for special education. Individualized Education Program (IEP). Some IEPs will include Section 504 accommodations necessary for success in the general classroom. Reasonable accommodations and other non-discriminatory employment practices. Population Identifies person as disabled so long as she/he meets the definition of qualified persons with disabilities; i.e., has a physical or mental impairments, which substantially limits a major life activity, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as disabled by others. Identifies 13 qualifying conditions: autism, deafness, deaf-blindness, hearing impairment, mental retardation, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairment or other health impairment, serious emotional disturbance, specific learning disability, speech or language impairment, traumatic brain injury, and visual impairment. Identifies person a disabled so long as she/he meets the definition of a qualified person with disabilities; i.e., has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities, has record of such impairment, or is regarded as disabled by others. Component Section 504 IDEA ADA Eligibility A person is eligible so long as she/he meets the definition of a qualified person with disabilities, i.e., currently has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as disabled by others. The student is not required to need special education services to be protected. A student is only eligible to receive special education and related services if the multidisciplinary team determines that the student has a disability under one of the 13 qualifying conditions and requires special education services. A person is eligible so long as she/he meets the definition of a qualified person with disabilities; i.e., currently has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such impairment or is regarded as disabled by others. Free Appropriate Public Education A student could receive special education services and/or related aids and services and/or accommodations. A student must be eligible and need special education before they are entitled to a related service. Addresses education in terms of accessibility requirements but cannot be read to require a lesser standard than Section 504. Requires private and public entities not to use employment practices that discriminate on the basis of a disability. Accessibility Federal regulations regarding building and program accessibility requires that newly constructed or altered facilities comply with applicable physical accessibility standards. The school must provide access to programs and activities located in other facilities. Requires that modifications must be made if necessary to provide access to a free appropriate public education. Federal regulations regarding building and program accessibility requires that newly constructed or altered facilities comply with applicable physical accessibility standards. The school must provide access to programs and activities located in other facilities. Drug and Alcohol Use Current drug use is not considered a disability. An individual who has stopped using drugs and/or alcohol and is undergoing rehabilitation could be eligible for accommodations. Drug and alcohol use is not covered under special education. Current drug use is not considered a disability. Current alcohol abuse that prevents individuals from performing duties of the job or that constitutes a direct threat to property or safety of others is not considered a disability. Contagious Diseases Persons are eligible for services and protected from discrimination if the impairment interferes with a major life activity. Could be eligible under the category of "other health impaired." Permits qualification standard requiring that an individual with a currently contagious disease or infection not pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others even with accommodations. Procedural Safeguard Requires notice to the parent or guardian with respect to identification, evaluation, and placement. Requires notice to the parent or guardian with respect to identification, evaluation, and placement. Notice provisions are more comprehensive. Minimum requirements of the notice are specified. Make provisions for public notice, hearings, and awarding attorney fees. Self-evaluation and transition plans are required and updated annually. Component Section 504 IDEA ADA Notice and Consent Parents must be notified and invited to participate in any decision concerning the identification, assessment, evaluation, and placement of their child. Parents must also be notified of the procedure to appeal decisions concerning any of these areas. Written notice is required prior to any change in placement. Not applicable. Evaluations Evaluation draws on information from a variety of sources that address all areas of suspected disability. The SST Team will obtain and review current, complete and reliable information on the student's educational, psychological, medical, and/or social/emotional history and status that is sufficient to (a) fully and accurately identify the nature and extent of any disabilities the student may have and (b) determine the services, if any, that are necessary and appropriate for the student's individual needs. Decisions are made by a group knowledgeable about the student, evaluation data, and placement options. Requires written parental notice. Parental support is a priority. Requires periodic reevaluation. Reevaluation is required before a significant change in placement. No provision is made for independent evaluations at district expense. However, if the District is unable to perform an evaluation necessary to obtain relevant information about a student, the District must arrange for the evaluation to conducted at no cost to the parents. A full comprehensive evaluation is required assessing all areas related to the suspected disability. A multidisciplinary team evaluates the student. Consent is required before the initial evaluation is conducted. Requires reevaluation to be conducted at least every 3 years. A reevaluation is not required before a significant change in placement. Provides for independent educational evaluation. A due process hearing is available if the school and parent disagree on the need for an independent evaluation. All schools should conduct or update their Section 504 self-evaluation regarding services, accessibility, practices, and policies to assure discrimination is not occurring with any individual with disabilities. Component Section 504 IDEA ADA Services When interpreting evaluation data and making service decisions, both laws require districts to: ■ draw upon information from a variety of sources ■ assure that all information is documented and considered ■ the service decision is made by a group of persons including those who are knowledgeable about the student, the disability, the meaning of the evaluation data, and placement options ■ ensure that the student is educated with his/her nondisabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate (Least Restrictive Environment--LRE) ■ require notice and evaluation before any change of services. Not applicable Review of Program Accommodations should be reviewed periodically An IEP review meeting is required at least annually, or before any significant change. Not applicable Grievance Procedures Requires districts to provide a grievance procedure for parents, students, and employees. Does not require a grievance procedure. Complaint Procedures (SEA) Any school district shall adopt and publish grievance procedures for resolution of ADA complaints. Complaint Procedures An individual or organization may file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights (OCR). An OCR compliant must be filed, in writing, within 180 days after the violation has occurred. In certain cases, OCR will consider complaints where more than 180 days have elapsed. A formal complaint process is required. Parents can file a complaint with the state, a decision must be provided within 60 days. An individual or organization may file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights. An OCR complaint must be filed, in writing, within 180 days after the violation has occurred. In certain cases OCR will consider complaints where more than 180 days have elapsed. Due Process Requires districts to provide impartial hearings for parents or guardians who disagree with the identification, evaluation, or placement of student with disabilities. School districts or parents can initiate due process hearings. Requires that the parent have an opportunity to participate and be represented by counsel. Other details are left to the discretion of the local school district. See the procedures regarding 504 due process hearings in the District Administrative Procedure 6025, Appendix E, Section C.B. and/or C.9. Delineates specific requirements. Either party can initiate due process hearings. The court may allow a reasonable attorney's fee for the prevailing party. Component Section 504 IDEA ADA Mediation Not required, however mediation should always be suggested. Exhaustion Administrative hearing is not required prior to OCR involvement or court action. The parent or guardian should exhaust all administrative hearings before seeking court action. An administrative hearing is not required prior to OCR involvement or court action. Enforcement Enforced by the U.S. Office for Civil Rights. The regional office is part of the U.S. Department of Education located at: 50 Beale Street, Suite 7200 San Francisco, CA 94105 Enforced by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs. The State Board of Education and the Office of Special Education Programs monitor compliance. Enforced by the U.S. Office for Civil Rights, the EEOC, or the U.S. Department of Justice, depending on the issue involved. Discipline of Students with Disabilities Requires that a school district evaluate any student with disabilities before making an initial placement or any subsequent, significant change in his or her placement, and when a proposed exclusion of a student with disabilities is permanent (expulsion), for an indefinite period, or for more than 10 consecutive school days. Before implementing a suspension or expulsion that constitutes a significant change in the student's placement, the school must conduct a reevaluation to determine if the behavior was caused by the disability and whether the student was properly placed and receiving appropriate services at the time of the behavior. If there is no relationship between the disability and the behavior, and if the student was properly placed and receiving appropriate services, the school can expel the student. The school is not required to provide services and/or accommodations during the expulsion period. Requires that a school district evaluate any student with disabilities before making an initial placement or any subsequent, significant change in his or her placement. The proposed exclusion of a student with disabilities that is permanent (expulsion), for an indefinite period, or for more than 10 consecutive school days, constitutes a "significant change in placement." Before implementing a suspension or expulsion that constitutes a significant change in the student's placement, the school must conduct a reevaluation to determine if the behavior was caused by the disability. If there is no relationship between the disability and the behavior, the school can expel the student but still needs to provide a free and appropriate public education. This means special education services outlined in the IEP. Not applicable. Reproduced with permission from the North Dakota Department of Public Instruction. Source: Section 504/ISP Guidelines for Educators, San Diego Unified School District, 2010. LRP July 21, 2010 Posted by Kristin at 5:59 AM 0 comments Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook Labels: 504, ada, civil rights, compare, education act, idea Older Posts Home Subscribe to: Posts (Atom) Below is a sampling of the most popular assistive technologies on the market today. TEXT TO SPEECH Students with severe reading disabilities may benefit from computer programs that can scan words and “read” them aloud via synthesized voices, some of which sound uncannily human. One is the Intel Reader, a device that can plug into a laptop for reading on-screen texts and also takes snapshots of, say, a newspaper page to be read aloud. Another is the ReadingPen Advanced, a pen-shaped scanner that glides over printed words and pronounces them through a built-in speaker. But the granddaddy of text-to-speech products is the Kurzweil Reader, which was designed by the inventor Ray Kurzweil in 1976 as a device for the blind. The latest version, a software package called the Kurzweil 3000, is stocked with features like word-by-word highlighting and foreign-language dictionaries. Other programs: GhostReader for the Mac, TextHelp Read and Write, and free programs and plug-ins like TypeIt ReadIt and Click, Speak. And while the Macintosh OS X comes with a free built-in reader, it does not include multiple languages. SPEECH TO TEXT “Students often have trouble getting thoughts down on paper by pen or typing,” says Pauline Auld, a senior learning specialist for the Calgary Board of Education. Voice-recognition software allows them to talk into a microphone and immediately see their words on screen. The Dragon line of products are leaders in this industry; Dragon Dictate for Mac and Dragon NaturallySpeaking for the P.C. get high marks for accurate translation. An iPhone version allows portability. But beware the gee-whiz factor: Depending on the disability and needs, the technology could slow down a student who has to spend extra time correcting errors and remembering punctuation commands. ORGANIZING IDEAS Can software help organize thoughts, improve writing skills and keep track of tasks? A few programs, with visual prompts and templates, promise something close. A product called Inspiration uses colored graphics — thought bubbles and hub-and-spoke diagrams — to help students when brainstorming and developing outlines for writing projects. The Kurzweil 3000 offers similar writing software and also gives users the ability to add virtual sticky notes and audio recordings to on-screen texts. Skoach, an online calendar and planning tool, provides visual feedback to warn you if your schedule is becoming overloaded. Of course, lots of visual cues aren’t always a good thing, depending on the type of disability. Says Mr. Kamil, “It might even be more disruptive in that there might actually be too much information on the screen.” Pen-based devices, designed to help keep notes organized, have many new converts. The LiveScribe Pulse SmartPen, for one, makes an audio recording simultaneously with pen marks on paper. A student can go back to a specific scribbled word in his notebook, touch the pen to that spot and hear a full recording of what the speaker was saying when the mark was made. Several students at Landmark College are using the pen to recall points made during class. “You can put down concepts and words and you don’t miss a thing,” says Michael Nieckoski, director of educational technology at Landmark. FOR MORE INFORMATION • “Assistive Technology: A Parent’s Guide,” by Marshall H. Raskind and Kristin Stanberry. A downloadable PDF with worksheet helps parents match technologies. • CALL Scotland, a unit within the University of Edinburgh’s education school. (CALL stands for Communication, Access, Literacy and Learning.) A Web site with studies and books on assistive technologies: callscotland.org.uk/ • National Center on Universal Design for Learning. A group advocating for products and services useful to all people, including those with disabilities: udlcenter.org • Digital Text Notes. A blog from Landmark College with regular updates on news about how technology can help people with learning disabilities: digitaltext.wordpress.com / Lisa Guernsey, director of the Early Education Initiative at the New America Foundation, writes often on technology. The Supreme Court’s Schaffer v. Weast decision harms 7.1 million children with disabilities and their families. Placing the burden of proof on parents risks inviting school districts to ignore or undermine rights and deprive children of a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Many parents have difficulty navigating the IDEA maze from identification and evaluation of their children through hearings and court actions. If and when they ask for a hearing, the burden of proof should be placed on school districts. This requires school districts to do nothing more than prove to an impartial officer that the IEP or placement they propose for a child meets the minimal standards of appropriateness imposed by the IDEA instead of requiring the parents to prove the negative, that the school district’s proposal is not appropriate. Placing the burden of proof on the school district furthers the IDEA’s stated purposes — ensuring that children receive the educational services required by law and that parents’ rights are protected. 20 U.S.C. § 1400(d). The fact is that very few parents even request due process hearings, and there are only 5 due process hearings per 10,000 special education students. See GAO Report 03-897 “Numbers of Formal Disputes are Generally Low and States are Using Mediation and Other Strategies to Resolve Conflicts” (2003). Indeed, a 2003 Department of Education study found that 94% of districts had no disputes go to a hearing. Only 0.3% of total spending on special education in 2000 was for mediation, due process hearings, and court cases. 150 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD S.5351 (May 12, 2004) (statement of Senator Kennedy). Placing the burden of proof on the school district is also fair because school districts have greater resources than parents. The overwhelming advantages of school districts over parents are self-evident. IEP meetings are inherently intimidating for parents; school personnel, who control the process, often vastly outnumber parents. School districts employ and therefore rely on teachers, psychologists, and other employees in IEP meetings to develop IEPs and then, on these same people (and other paid experts) to testify as witnesses at hearings. Tax dollars pay for all these witnesses. Parents, on the other hand, are often unable to afford expert witnesses. In fact, many parents of children with disabilities live in poverty or difficult financial circumstances and are less educated than parents of children in the general population. (M. Wagner, C. Marder, J. Blackorby, & D. Cardoso, The Children We Serve: The Demographic Characteristics of Elementary and Middle School Students with Disabilities and Their Households (Sept. 2002), 23 -24, 28-29 available at http://www.seels.net/designdocs/SEELS_Children_We_Serve_Report.pdf (as visited November 29, 2005). If the parents believe that the school district has failed to provide the free appropriate public education (FAPE) mandated by law, the only recourse is to seek to due process. At these hearings, school districts not only have their built-in expert witnesses, but also taxpayer-financed or insurance financed lawyers. The vast majority of parents are not represented by counsel. Parents are at a substantial disadvantage and placing the burden of proof on the school districts is important to simply keep the playing field level. School districts also have free, unfettered access to all relevant information about a proposed placement. Parents do not and are often denied access to those programs in advance of hearings. When parents’ experts are permitted to observe children in class, observations are limited. Placing the burden on parents risks denying children with disabilities the free appropriate public education to which they are entitled under the IDEA. Many parents are left to their own ingenuity to ensure enforcement of the IDEA’s procedural safeguards. This is not sufficient for protecting the fundamental educational rights that a bipartisan Congress created 30 years ago for students with disabilities. In allocating the burden to school districts, many courts have recognized the foregoing school district advantages. A majority of the appellate courts that have addressed this issue over the last 30 years have concluded that the burden of proof should be on the school district. Recognizing these same realities, several states have chosen to place the burden of proof on school districts by statute or regulation. The Supreme Court’s decision in Weast further ensures that parents will find the process more intimidating and daunting. It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court overlooked the immense consequences for all families-in particular those families with limited resources. THE ABOVE ARTICLE WAS TAKEN FROM THE COPAA WEBSITE --CREDIT TO ROBERT BERLOW WHO I USED TO WORK WITH AT THE CHILDREN'S LAW CENTER IN D.C. An expert explains how and why to monitor your child's progress toward his IEP goals. By GreatSchools Staff By the time "Mrs. Bailey" contacted a professional to evaluate her son, she had been receiving quarterly progress reports from his public school for five years, telling her that Kevin was making progress toward achieving the academic goals listed in his Individualized Education Program (IEP). However, her observations of Kevin's homework and the graded school work that came home didn't match the school's evaluation, and she wanted a psychologist to provide a "second opinion." The outside evaluation confirmed his mother's concerns - he had deficits in math calculation and written expression skills. In fact, Kevin's written expression skills were severely delayed and fell in the first percentile - meaning that 99 percent of students his age performed better on the test. Naturally, Mrs. Bailey felt astonished, frustrated, and guilty about not realizing Kevin's lack of progress sooner in his schooling. Parents of children with learning disabilities (LD) who are receiving special education services receive regular reports of progress on their children's IEP goals, as mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA). Often these progress reports don't really provide parents specific information, based on assessment data, as to whether their child is making progress or not. There are several key factors that can have a positive impact on determining whether or not a child makes real, measurable progress. These include:
To help you play a proactive role in monitoring your child's IEP, this article will provide detailed information about each of these key factors as it relates to your child's special education services. Comprehensive Evaluation A comprehensive evaluation should include assessments tailored to the problems for which the child was referred for evaluation. The "reason for referral," part of the evaluation documents for the IEP, describes the child's learning problems, as well as any factors contributing to academic performance difficulties. To get a complete picture of a child's abilities and skills in the home and school environments, evaluation procedures should include all of the following:
Typically, a school district evaluation will identify an area of unexpected academic weakness and determine whether the weakness is severe enough that the child requires special education services in order to benefit from the general education program. A comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation - most often conducted by a private professional, but sometimes by a school district - typically looks at a fuller range of academic strengths and weaknesses, and at how a child processes information in several areas. In my experience, the better you understand your child's learning problems, the greater the chances that you can persuade the school to conduct a more comprehensive evaluation. And, of course, if you disagree with the school evaluation, you always have the legal right to request that an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) be conducted at district expense. Explicitly Stated "Present Levels of Performance" Results of a comprehensive evaluation should concretely identify your child's strengths and weaknesses which can then be used to develop your child's IEP. Present Levels of Performance(PLOP) should provide you baseline data in very specific terms about what your child can and cannot do in a particular academic or functional area. For example, a statement of a child's present level of performance in reading might be: "Julia can read words, both in isolation and in context, containing short vowels and silent 'e.' However, she is only able to read words containing vowel teams (i.e. /ai/, /ea/, /oa/, /ee/) and dipthongs (i.e. /oi/, /oy/, /oo/, /au/) in isolation with 30% accuracy." Goals and objectives would then be written to increase Julia's accuracy in reading words with vowel teams and dipthongs. Baseline data provide a starting point for determining whether the child makes the expected improvement in learning over a given period of time. In addition, IDEA requires that, in order for a child to be eligible for special education services under the Specific Learning Disability category, school districts must have "data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement, at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the child's parents." This documentation is very helpful when identifying a child's present level of performance. A word of caution:Results of achievement tests are often reported where there is supposed to be a statement of the child's present level of performance. For example, you may see "WIAT-II Word Reading SS 80" for present level of performance on IEP goal pages. However, achievement tests are designed to measure the performance of many children at a single point in time, rather than to document a single child's progress over time, as PLOP requires. The PLOP sets the starting point for your particular child's work toward goals. Appropriate, Measurable Goals and Benchmarks Annual goals and benchmarks in your child's IEP should be measurable and linked to your child's present levels of performance, as well as to your state's academic content standards. (Note: "Benchmarks" are measurable steps toward a child's IEP goals. Although IDEA 2004 eliminated the legal requirement for benchmarks, regular progress reports are still mandated by law, and many schools continue to use the term "benchmarks.") Many times parents say that when goals are reviewed during IEP meetings, they are unsure as to whether their child's goals are either appropriate or measurable. Here are a few questions you can ask to find out:
Here is Danny's revised annual goal: "Danny will write two to three paragraphs on a given topic, using correct mechanics (capitalization, ending punctuation), spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and organization." His benchmarks were:
Scientifically Based Instruction To progress in their learning, kids with LD also need high quality instruction that:
School districts do not typically specify in the IEP what instructional method(s) will be used to assist a child in achieving his goals. One way for a parent to address this issue is to ask the district to describe specific, scientifically proven instructional components when a child's educational needs are being discussed. For example, for a child with a reading disability, parents should indicate that multisensory, explicit, structured reading instruction has been shown to improve reading skills. Many school districts do not discuss what instructional method(s) will be used, or whether that method has been deemed appropriate for a child to make adequate progress on his IEP goals. So, during IEP meetings, ask about the methodology that will be used to help your child make progress in her particular areas of academic deficit, especially about whether it is research based. Continuous Progress Monitoring Progress monitoring is a key element of a child's IEP, but most schools don't monitor a child's progress using continuous, objective data collection that is easily communicated to parents. Kids with LD need systematic and frequent progress monitoring to determine academic growth. Progress monitoring is a scientifically based practice that is used both to assess a child's academic performance, and to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. Academic performance is measured weekly or monthly. Progress toward meeting the child's goals is measured by comparing expected rates to actual rates of learning. Instructional techniques are adjusted to meet individual learning needs based on these measurements. The benefits of progress monitoring include accelerated learning for students - because they receive instruction that is more appropriate to their individual needs - better informed instructional decisions, and higher teacher expectations for students. The most common method used to monitor student progress is called Curriculum-Based Measurement or CBM. CBM is research-validated and uses short-duration assessments to monitor progress in reading, math, spelling, and writing. CBM procedures are reliable, valid, and standardized. Student performance is graphed over time to determine progress and the effectiveness of instructional programming. The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) ( http://dibels.uoregon.edu ) is an example of CBM that assesses early literacy and pre-reading skills, as well as predicts later reading proficiency. But best practices in progress monitoring are not in place in all schools. Many special educators of administer a standardized, norm-reference achievement test prior to the child's annual review IEP meeting to determine a child's academic progress. Again, as was noted earlier in regard to assessing present levels of performance, individually administered norm-referenced achievement tests, (such as the Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery-III: Tests of Achievement; or the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-II) are designed to compare a child's performance to that of his age peers at a single point in time, not to measure the progress of an individual child over time. If the school reports that your child is making progress toward his IEP goals, and you don't agree, your first step is to ask what methods special education personnel are using to routinely monitor and evaluate your child's progress on IEP goals. Most goal sheets in a child's IEP document have columns to identify these progress-monitoring methods and specific dates when progress will be reviewed, typically at the end of each quarter. Unfortunately, progress monitoring evaluation procedures typically include "teacher observations," "review of work," and/or "teacher-made tests," and progress is reviewed only once per quarter. This approach isn't sufficient to determine adequate progress toward goals, or to determine if the current instructional method is effective. Again, when you have a question about your child's progress, ask your child's special education teacher or any other service provider to show you the data documenting your child's progress. Further information about progress monitoring can be found on the Internet: When In Doubt, Ask As the parent of a child receiving special education services, you are entitled to data-based information that clearly demonstrates what progress, if any, your child is making. Because without data, it's just someone's opinion. If you aren't sure whether your child is making progress or how much progress he's making, schedule a meeting with his special education teacher to discuss how your child's progress is being monitored and measured, and how that information will be regularly communicated to you. If questions and concerns continue after talking with special education personnel, it may be appropriate to request an IEP meeting to get further clarification about your child's progress. When you understand the essential components of an effective IEP, you can advocate confidently - and successfully - for your child's progress toward IEP goals. Updated February 2010 If you have an IEP for your child, consider the need for a personal curriculum to achieve her dream of employment, further education, and independent living. Read on: Overview: About the Michigan Merit Curriculum The curriculum, which took effect for students entering the eighth grade in 2006 (Class of 2011) requires four years of math, four years of English, three years of science, including biology and either physics or chemistry and an online learning experience. A foreign language requirement still is being phased in. These exceptions are allowed: • Adjusting math expectations for students challenged with meeting Algebra II expectations. • Modifications of some requirements for students who transfer from an out-of-state or nonpublic school system, because they may not have time to meet all requirements in less than four years. • Modifications to allow students who have individualized education programs to demonstrate proficiency in the course material. Diploma likely out of reach for some Michigan students Mom: New law will leave kids with disabilities behind Kathleen Lavey • klavey@lsj.com • December 30, 2010 Breck Graham is doing his best to learn. The 14-year-old eighth-grader at Grand Ledge's Hayes Middle School even meets with a tutor after school to build reading skills. But his mom, Shelia Graham, fears he won't be awarded a diploma when he graduates in 2015, thanks to a portion of Michigan school law that takes effect this year. Students who don't meet the strict academic requirements of the Michigan Merit Curriculum won't get diplomas. It's part of a push to boost academic achievement for all students in Michigan. But Shelia Graham and others say it doesn't make any provision for kids with disabilities. "No Child Left Behind is just a joke," she said, referring to federal legislation designed to improve schools. "Because states are leaving behind a big group of kids." The Michigan Merit Curriculum, which took effect in 2006 for the 2011 graduating class, requires four years of math, including geometry and algebra, four years of English and three science classes, including biology and either physics or chemistry, as well as one online learning experience. A foreign language requirement is being phased in. School districts can choose to offer a certificate of high school completion instead of a diploma to students who don't master the curriculum. Cindy Anderson, assistant superintendent in the Ingham Intermediate School District, acknowledged that educators have concerns about the issue and have been working on it. Some kids at risk"I'm not sure we know the scope of the impact of this," she said. "We do know there are certain subgroups of students that are at risk." Graduating without a diploma could put up yet another hurdle for students with disabilities when they finish school and seek work, said Alicia Paterni, executive director of the Capital Area Business Leadership Network Disability Council. She said people with disabilities already have a drastically higher unemployment rate. "I can see employers coming to me saying, 'Why should I take this certificate over a diploma?' " she said. "The implications are concerning."Special education students each receive an individualized education program, which sets goals for and lays out a plan for them to make progress through school. Kids with such plans get some leeway under the Michigan Merit legislation, Anderson said, and may be able to earn a diploma. "In the legislation, it says the personal curriculum has to incorporate as much of the content expectation in a particular subject as is practicable," Anderson said. "So how far we modify the merit curriculum and still call it the merit curriculum is our challenge." Anderson said kids who don't earn diplomas will be allowed to enter Michigan trade or vocational schools, and many community colleges, and apply for state and federal aid. They also can enlist in certain branches of the military. Anderson's best advice for families who think their kids might be at risk: Don't wait to address the issue. "We need to proactively have conversations between the schools, the student and the parents as kids start to struggle," she said. "We need to look at their course of study, their career goals and then have everybody working on the same page together." Raise the bar, Michigan! 12/13/2010
Hopefully Michigan will raise their standards to meet the reality of what children with disabilities can do! Florida raises expectations for students with disabilitiesModified standards for some will be gone next year; mastering same material as peers is the goal Posted: December 11, 2010 - 12:00am JON M. FLETCHER/ Throughout the state, thousands of children with disabilities are studying modified curriculum in one or more of their classes, often because it is thought the general education material is too difficult for them to master. But state officials believe that's untrue and that most children with disabilities - except in rare cases - are capable of completing the same course work as their peers. "In fact, the majority of the kids with disabilities are able to earn a standard high school diploma, and that should be our goal for them," said Karen Denbroeder, an administrator in the state's Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services. "When we put kids in separate classrooms with modified curriculum, we're taking away that access to a standard diploma." Now in some districts, students can either take standard general education courses, special standards or something in the middle called standard curriculum with modifications. Standard general education is open to all students. Special standards, which cover the same type of material but are taught on a less complex level depending on the ability of the student, are open to students with significant cognitive disabilities, such as autism. Both of those options remain in place. It's the modified courses, in which children aren't required to master as much of the material as other children, that the state is doing away with. By next year, the state will no longer approve courses that are modified special standards for elementary schools. It will do the same in middle school by 2012-13 and in high school by 2013-14. Denbroeder said the majority of students with disabilities should be in general education classrooms, even if that's with accommodations or teachers providing extra assistance. Some districts, including Nassau County, stopped offering modified courses years ago. Others, including Clay and St. Johns counties, have no more than a dozen elementary school students on modified courses. In Duval, the rule change will affect about 2,400 elementary and middle school students. Modified courses would still be offered in high school for students going into 10th grade or higher, though some are already being moved toward standard curriculum. Children don't always fit in one of two categories, said Jill Fane, a parent trainer at Central Florida Parent Center, which assists parents of children and young adults with disabilities. She is also the parent of a child who has autism. Fane is thrilled that more children will be in general education courses. But she has concerns that some children may continue to need modifications to the standard curriculum. "I hope they find something for the kids in the middle," she said. "It's not a cookie-cutter type of thing." Fane wants to make sure her son Maxwell, 14, receives his standard diploma. A student at Kernan Middle School, this is the first year Maxwell has been taking general education classes. He attends some classes with other children with disabilities and some with children without disabilities. Fane has been happy with the results because Maxwell is thriving. Fane said she made the change now because she wants to prepare him for high school next year, where he'll need to be in mostly general education classes to earn a standard diploma. But she wants to make sure that he and other children have the resources they need to succeed. Making the transition District officials will meet with parents and other community leaders in the next few months to discuss how best to help children be successful in whatever courses they take, said Ken Sutton, executive director of Duval's Exceptional Education and Student Services department. About 14 percent of the students in the state have a disability. The state has been moving toward increasing the rigor of courses for students with disabilities since 2001, Denbroeder said. The schools will make sure all disabled students' Individual Education Plans, or IEPs, include any accommodations or other assistance they will need to do well in class, she said. Since 2001, the state's percentage of students with a disability taking general education courses has increased from 48 percent to 67 percent as of last year, Denbroeder said. And the percentage of students with disabilities receiving a standard diploma within four years has increased from 30 percent in 2001 to 49 percent last year, she said. Duval County has almost 16,500 students with some kind of disability. About 30 percent of those students are on special standards in kindergarten through 12th grade. While the changes in elementary and middle school are clear, it's less certain what the changes from the state will mean in high school. In addition to standard diplomas, which any student has an option to work toward, students can earn special diplomas, with either an academic-type track or a vocational track. Special diplomas will continue to be available, but some of the rules about how to earn them could change. A federal policy requires that special diplomas don't count in a school's graduation rate. And now graduation rates are part of the formula on which high schools are graded. Some high schools are already moving more students into general education courses. At Ed White High School, most of teacher Chris Guerrieri's students with disabilities are now required to take standard curriculum. For some, the move isn't a problem. But Guerrieri worries that some are being set up for failure. "It's definitely overwhelming for the kids," he said. Some of the students at the high school read at a first-grade level, he said. Requiring those students to use the same books and tackle the same curriculum isn't appropriate, Guerrieri said. But for some kids in modified classes, the move to general standards could be good. Neptune Beach Elementary School teacher Marylou Graham said she had a student at another school who people thought needed to be in a special education class. But moving him into general education classes helped him grow. "By the third year, it was as different as night and day," Graham said. Least Restrictive Environment 11/17/2010
Least Restrictive Environment=Placement While a district can place a child in a particular classroom or school based on the availability of special education services, it cannot allow such concerns to dictate the child's placement on the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) continuum.---This is the case summary from the Letter to Trigg Office of Special Education Programs, 50 IDELR 48. (2007) What this means for Parents: Part B of 34 CFR s 300.116 requires placement decisions be made in conformity with the least restrictive environment provisions. These requirements are consistent with section 612(a)(5) of IDEA which requires, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, be educated with children who are not disabled. Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment should occur only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. Bottom Line: Placement decisions must be determined on an individual, case-by-case basis, depending on each child's unique needs and circumstances and based on the child's IEP. Placement decisions are not to be made on the availability of special education and related services, configuration of the service delivery system, or the category of disability. Posted by Children's Advocacy Resources for Education at 10:58 AM Harassment and Bullying 11/17/2010
Harassment and Bullying Laws which prohibit bullying and harassment in school: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972: Prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. Section 504 and Title II of the ADA: Prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. School districts may violate these civil rights statutes and the Office of Civil Rights Department's implementing regulations when peer harassment based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability is sufficiently serious that it creates a hostile environment and such harassment is encouraged, tolerated, not adequately addressed, or ignored by school employees. What is harassment? verbal acts, name calling, graphic and written statements, or other conduct that may by physically threatening, harmful, or humiliating. It does not have to include an intent to harm, be directed at a specific target, or involve repeated incidents. It must create an environment for the student that interferes with his/her ability to participate in or benefit from opportunities at school. When does it violate civil rights? When such harassment is based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability. Who enforces such a violation? The Office of Civil Rights. For the OCR regional office serving your state, visit: http://wdcrobcolp01.ed.gov/CFAPPS/OCR/contactus.cfm or call 1-800-421-3481 Other laws against bullying/harassment? No Child Left Behind(NCLB). The State of Michigan State Board of Education created a Statewide Safe School Choice Policy to be eligible to receive funds under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Pursuant to the NCLB policy any student who is a victim of a violent criminal offense has the right to transfer to another public school within the district, including public school academies (charter schools); and all students have the right to transfer to another school within the school district, including public school academies, if the school is labeled a Persistently Dangerous School. What is a Persistently Dangerous School? If for three years 5 pupils (or 2.5%) enrolled in school have been expelled for more than 10 school days for: arson, physical assault, bomb or similar threat, criminal sexual conduct, possession of a dangerous weapon, or if 5 pupils have been the victims of violent criminal offenses. There are various laws out there to protect our children, but they are only as strong as the enforcement of them. If you feel that your child has been a subject to harassment or bullying and the school has not addressed your concern, please contact me for a free initial consultation potentially followed by a case consult as to what you can do as a parent to ensure that this does not happen again to your child or to others that my be suffering as well. Posted by Children's Advocacy Resources for Education at 1:01 PM |
RSS Feed
