Bring Back Some “Old School” Education

There is a common belief among the education community that education theory is evolving.  Ph.D.s and school administrators keep thinking up new ways to ‘improve’ our education system, for example ‘common core’ and ‘standardized testing’.  Problem with that theory is we are graduating more children from the K-12 system now who do not have the basic skill set to get a job, live on their own, or function in the post-secondary education environment.

I have a thought about that: we have abandoned some of the tried-and-true methods that worked in the 50s, 60s, and 70s for the sake of ‘experimenting’ with our children’s education.  My suggestion is to resurrect some of those ‘old school’ methodologies.  Here are some techniques that studies have proven to be effective:

1. Bring back music and the arts into our school systems as mandatory courses

Studies have repeatedly shown that music and art trigger portions of the brain that ‘core subjects’ do not and help the brain process other subjects better, for example math.

One study showed that listening to music reduces distraction when doing schoolwork.

“We seem to have two attention systems: a conscious one that enables us to direct our focus towards things we know we want to concentrate on and an unconscious one that shifts attention towards anything our senses pick up that might be significant. The unconscious one is simpler, more fundamental, and linked to emotional processing rather than higher reasoning. It also operates faster.”

“Music is a very useful tool in such situations. It provides non-invasive noise and pleasurable feelings, to effectively neutralise the unconscious attention system’s ability to distract us.”

Other studies have concluded the same, indicating that our ability to concentrate during studying is enhanced by music.

The same is true with art, but for different reasons.

“Almost as soon as motor skills are developed, children communicate through artistic expression. The arts challenge us with different points of view, compel us to empathize with “others,” and give us the opportunity to reflect on the human condition. Empirical evidence supports these claims: Among adults, arts participation is related to behaviors that contribute to the health of civil society, such as increased civic engagement, greater social tolerance, and reductions in other-regarding behavior. Yet, while we recognize art’s transformative impacts, its place in K-12 education has become increasingly tenuous.”

“We find that a substantial increase in arts educational experiences has remarkable impacts on students’ academic, social, and emotional outcomes.”

2.  Return vocational training to K-12 education

An article in Forbes magazine a few years ago observed:

“Throughout most of U.S. history, American high school students were routinely taught vocational and job-ready skills along with the three Rs: reading, writing and arithmetic.”

“[T]he focus shifted to preparing all students for college, and college prep is still the center of the U.S. high school curriculum.”

“Not everyone is good at math, biology, history and other traditional subjects that characterize college-level work. Not everyone is fascinated by Greek mythology, or enamored with Victorian literature, or enraptured by classical music. Some students are mechanical; others are artistic. Some focus best in a lecture hall or classroom; still others learn best by doing, and would thrive in the studio, workshop or shop floor.”

“The demise of vocational education at the high school level has bred a skills shortage in manufacturing today, and with it a wealth of career opportunities for both under-employed college grads and high school students looking for direct pathways to interesting, lucrative careers.”

The reality for most school-age children is that they will only be exposed to college-centered curriculum in public school and those who don’t have that interest will suffer.  It was exacerbated when President Obama “called for every American to pursue some form of education beyond high school ” during an address to a joint session of Congress in 2009.

However, it is well-established that not every kid should or can afford to go to college.  What is perhaps worse is that the drive for every child to go to college has resulted in student loan debt skyrocketing and nearly impossible to elminate due to a lack of jobs in those sectors.

“Now that the Department of Education has made this data available, it appears that, in fact, the average student loan borrower takes longer than ten years to repay his/her loans.”

“Because more than half of defaults [on student loans] occur outside the [time] window covered by current federal default statistics, overall default rates are much higher than previously thought.”

“These data suggest that whether a degree is completed, and what type of degree is completed, may be more important factors related to the increasing default rate than the amount students borrow.”

The data is pretty clear – jobs that graduates get can’t keep up with repayments of student loans.  This argues in favor of a trade education, where the student debt is likely to be much lower, but job security is much higher.

3.  Teach cursive handwriting

The benefits of learning cursive go way beyond the ability to sign checks.  Article after article touts this curriculum, but schools have abandoned it because it is the “computer age”.  That’s not an excuse.

A New York Times article from 2013 discussed how learning cursive stimulates the brain.

“Putting pen to paper stimulates the brain like nothing else, even in this age of e-mails, texts and tweets.”

“As a result, the physical act of writing in cursive leads to increased comprehension and participation.”

“Regardless of the age we are in or the technological resources at one’s disposal, success is measured by thought formation, and the speed and efficiency in which it is communicated. Because of this, students need a variety of technologies, including cursive handwriting, to succeed.”

William Klemm, Ph.D., Senior Professor of Neuroscience at Texas A&M University, offers numerous biological and psychological benefits of learning cursive.

Still another author provides 10 reasons to learn cursive, not least of which are:

  • Improved neural connections
  • Improved fine motor skills
  • Increased retention
  • Ease of learning – “Cursive is of particular value to children with learning challenges such as dyslexia, dysgraphia, and difficulties with attention.”

Conclusion

While this may not cure all of our education woes, it certainly is worth trying.  We are failing our kids right now.  Why not go back to methods that worked in the past instead of experimenting with the new?  It is my opinion if we accept the basic premises that (a) not every child is cut out for college; (b) that providing alternative skill set training expands the opportunities for our kids; and (c) returning to proven-successful teaching methodologies, such as inclusion of music and the arts and teaching cursive, will improve their academic progress and cognitive abilities, then we are likely to see a brighter future for our children.

 

The Appropriate Use of Assistive Technology for Students – Antonia Guccione, MA, MS [Guest Blog Post]

Discerning how, when, and why students should access Assistive Technology to support learning involves many levels of decision making.  It all starts with the IEP, the student’s present levels of performance, his educational needs, and the impact those needs have on learning. Thank goodness there is help! The Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative provides a series of tools for educators and parents. The WATI Assistive Technology Consideration Guide is a great place to start if you suspect that there are tools that are necessary to support a student’s learning.

For example, if a student has an issue with writing, it can seriously impact that student’s ability to function in the classroom and do grade level work. For our purposes, we will assume an upper elementary age male child and begin our assessment and decision making there.  He may not be able to express thoughts, opinions, or ideas on paper.  How will he form complete sentences and/or organized paragraphs?  How can Assistive Technology help him?

Discerning how, when, and why students should access Assistive Technology to support learning involves many levels of decision making.  It all starts with the IEP, the student’s present levels of performance, his educational needs, and the impact those needs have on learning. Thank goodness there is help! The Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative provides a series of tools for educators and parents. The WATI Assistive Technology Consideration Guide is a great place to start if you suspect that there are tools that are necessary to support a student’s learning.

http://www.wati.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/WATI-Assessment.pdf [PDF file]

THE WATI

Enter the WATI Assistive Technology Consideration Guide. First, the team must agree on the impact of this issue.  While many are possible, let’s assume that the major impact for this student is his ability to do grade level work in the classroom and express his thoughts on paper in an organized paragraph.  The question becomes whether there is currently assistive technology- either devices, tools, hardware, or software that might help address this need?

Referring to the Assistive Technology Continuum, there are Low Tech, Mid Tech, and High-Tech tools to consider. Have any been tried?  Is there data to support the trials?  Possible Low-Tech tools include specialized pens, raised paper, highlighters, post -its, and slanted surfaces. Mid Tech Tools include tape recorders, spell checkers and dictionaries.  High Tech tools include word prediction software, word banks, and word processors.

Finally, would the use of these assistive technology tools support the student in performing this skill more easily in the least restrictive environment? If the answer is yes, it is time to consult with the IEP team and document this need, its impact, and interventions that might be helpful.

https://adayinourshoes.co m/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/WATI-Assessing-Students-Needs-for-Assistive-Technology.pdf [PDF file]

Based on lack of progress on IEP goals, the Committee on Special Education must consider a student’s need for assistive technology devices and/or services, as well as possible modifications and accommodations.  If a student needs such devices and/or services, the appropriate sections of the IEP must specify the:

  • nature of the assistive technology to be provided; 
  • services the student needs to use the assistive technology device; 
  • frequency, and duration of such services; 
  • location where the assistive technology devices and/or services will be provided; and 
  • whether such a device is required to be used in the student’s home or another setting in order for the student to receive a free appropriate public education.

http://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/publications/iepguidance/present.htm

GOALS

Goals must be written accordingly, and I recommend using the concept of a SMART Goal.  A specific goal which is measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely has a greater chance of being accomplished than a general goal.

https://east.madison.k12.wi.us/files/east/Smart%20Goals%20Information%20CC%2011_0.pdf [PDF file]

Here is an example of an objective taken directly from an AT-Resource Guide for written communication which utilizes Assistive Technology:

Goal: Jon will use an electronic graphic organizer to write an opening topic, a closing, and three supporting detail sentences to construct a five-sentence paragraph, by the end of the first semester.

Objective: Given five sentences in an electronic graphic organizer, Jon will identify and arrange the opening topic, the closing, and three supporting detail sentences to create a paragraph, by the end of the first six weeks of school.

https://www.ocali.org/up_doc/AT_Resource_Guide_6.pdf [PDF file]

IN THE IEP

Another resource which offers support to parents in understanding what Assistive Technology is and how to get it into a student’s IEP is noted below:

https://adayinourshoes.com/assistive-technology/

Once the tools have been obtained, how does one manage the Assistive Technology?  Who trains the teachers and parents? Who trains the student?  But that is a whole other discussion!

Even if the present levels of performance indicate a student who can participate in a discussion, that doesn’t mean he can write about it. A basic understanding of texts and current events is not the issue. However, ask him to summarize that information in a paragraph and the sky falls down.  On the IEP, present levels of performance are recorded, and appropriate sources of data have been discussed and administered.  These have included both formal and informal assessments, with work samples, and data charts to show progress or lack of progress over time. Are there modifications and accommodations that have been incorporated? Have these interventions resulted in significant progress or is this student still having difficulty responding to a writing prompt.

FINAL NOTES

In conclusion, Assistive Technology provides many tools to support learning and can result in a positive outcome.  It is a timely process, but one worth pursuing. Better to know what works sooner rather than later.  Assess the student’s needs, document the impact on learning, and then choose the appropriate tool to support learning in the least restrictive environment.  Keep accurate data to demonstrate progress.

If you suspect your child could benefit from assistive technology, reach out to the professionals involved in his education.  In addition, access the sites documented in this article.  I’ve only presented one need, and that is for writing. I haven’t even touched on communication, mobility, motor aspects of writing, reading, learning and studying, math, recreation, or activities of daily living, vision, hearing, and language processing. Understand that the array of Assistive Technology Tools is vast.  Following a process to obtain these tools may be involved, but it can result in access to tools that can help this child for life. 


Antonia Guccione, MA; MS

Antonia is a consultant, educator, and author with over forty years’ experience working with students of all ages, strengths, and needs.

Which Teaching Style is “Best”? – Antonia Guccione, MA, MS [Guest Blog Post]

In the districts in which I taught as a Special Educator as well as in the districts where my own children attended school, parents would always advocate for certain teachers; “the good ones” —the ones whom everyone respected and the ones who always got good results.  It’s hard to say whether there is a correlation between a student’s learning style and certain teachers. Is there one type of teacher that does well with all students?  Probably not, but if you are in the business of trying to find the best “fit” for your child, there are some things to consider.

Teacher’s Individual Style

First think about the teacher’s individual style. In the book Classroom Discipline and Management, Clifford Edwards discusses three primary teaching styles. Everyone would like to be or have the Democratic Teacher.  Children develop a sense of belonging and have a stake in the classroom. Firm guidance is being provided with each step and children are involved in making decisions.  In addition, children are taking responsibility for their own work and are involved in cooperative learning experiences where each can explore, discover, and choose his or her own way.  All the while, the teacher is firm, yet kind. This is the ideal. The results are positive; children develop a sense of belonging and have a stake in the classroom.

However, there are teachers who favor more of an autocratic style.  They tend to force their will on students rather than motivate them.  There may be little warmth or humor in interactions and these teachers refuse to tolerate any deviation from rules.  In the worst case, they exact punishment for those who refuse to conform.  Is it necessary sometimes to be firm?  Of course.  Are there consequences for improper behavior? Yes, definitely. Teachers must use their judgement as each situation differs. However, a daily diet of this autocratic style may result in students who are hostile to demands, commands, and reprimands. 

Then there are teachers who are too permissive and promote a classroom atmosphere which is chaotic and not conducive to either teaching or learning. They underestimate the importance of rules and do not follow through on consequences.   Sometimes a child needs some room or a special set of circumstances.  Again, teachers must use their judgment.  On an ongoing basis though, students may feel empowered to challenge rules and expectations at every turn.

The Child’s Individual Learning Style

When thinking about the best fit for your child, another variable to consider is his or her individual learning style.  You, as parents, know your child best. By the time children have completed third grade you are probably familiar with their style, be it visual, auditory, kinesthetic, or geared to reading and writing.   You know what kinds of assignments appeal to them and which ones are problematic. 

https://teach.com/what/teachers-know/learning-styles/ .

In addition, the theory of multiple intelligences can often be helpful in understanding the needs of your child. There are seven basic styles.  Which does your child favor?

  • Linguistic intelligence (“word smart”)
  • Logical-mathematical intelligence (“number/reasoning smart”)
  • Spatial intelligence (“picture smart”)
  • Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence (“body smart”)
  • Musical intelligence (“music smart”)
  • Interpersonal intelligence (“people smart”)
  • Intrapersonal intelligence (“self-smart”)
  • Naturalist intelligence (“nature smart”)

Teaching Environment

Classroom management is a topic onto itself. Behavior does not happen in a vacuum. Many a student has been coaxed into learning by an engaging lesson which peaks his or her curiosity. Teachers need to excel at their craft.  According to James Stronge, effective teachers excel in the following: 

  • Professional knowledge.
  • Instructional planning.
  • Instructional delivery.
  • Assessment
  • Learning environment.
  • Professionalism.

It is a teacher’s primary responsibility to devise engaging lessons in line with standards and assessments as well as a student’s learning style.

In the end, I think good teachers will devise a combination of the three basic types that are in the literature.  While the ideal may be the democratic teacher, sometimes a more permissive attitude is needed; other times some firmness is required. 

Action Items

If you find that your child is thriving, reach out and thank that teacher! However, if you find that your child is developing coping behaviors in school which are not to your liking, dig below the surface and investigate the teaching style, the classroom atmosphere, and the curriculum and assignments being presented.  Think about your child’s type of intelligence and learning style. Consult with the professionals to engage their help if necessary. Somewhere in there is a solution to promote an atmosphere conducive to teaching and learning and a happy and engaged child. 

Edwards, Clifford H,  Classroom Discipline and Management,.  John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, N.J.  2000.

Stronge, James H, Qualities of Effective Teachers,  Alexandria, Va., ASCD, 2002.

Why Schools Shouldn’t Reject Your Child’s Diagnosis

Recently, I have heard (far too many) stories from parents that the schools are taking away services from their child and/or denying providing services because the school does not believe the child’s diagnosis.  This is wrong and illegal on so many levels, but I will adress the three (3) most important reasons why schools should never deny or reject a child’s diagnosis. 1. Only licensed physicians (medical doctors, doctors of osteopathy, and/or nurse practitioners depending on your state law) may provide a diagnosis and most IEP team members from the school district are NOT licensed physicians (school psychologists are not licensed physicians). As an example, in New Jersey (and most states have similar laws to my knowledge) a person must have a license to “practice medicine or surgery”.  N.J.S.A. 45:9-6.  Diagnosis is practicing medicine.  N.J.S.A. 45:9-5.1. If one of the school staff suggests or takes the position that your child doesn’t have a diagnosis that has been confirmed by a physician, ask such person if he/she holds a physician’s license in your state. 2. Many diagnoses are “hidden” disorders or neurological problems, but should not be denied simply because you can’t “see” them. If a child has Down Syndrome or Cerebral Palsy or Muscular Dystrophy or is an amputee, the disability is likely obvious.  (I prefer not to automatically assume it is.)  However, many disorders like Autism, ADHD, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Dyslexia, Cystic Fibrosis, Sensory or Auditory Processing Disorder, Krohn’s Disease, Depression, and others are what I call “hidden” disorders because they are often not obvious just observing a child.  This is another reason that only licensed physicians who understand what tests need to be performed in order to make the proper diagnosis should do so.  I’ve heard teachers and school administrators (people who should know better) say, “But [he/she] looks normal!”  What an awful comment about a child with a disability. Frankly, I can’t understand why school personnel even question this.  For example, I have diabetes – a neurological disease.  Looking at me, you would not know this.  I do long charity bicycle rides of 70+ miles.  Most people would say, “He seems fine.”  While that may be the outward appearance, does it mean that I don’t have diabetes or that the disease does not affect me? It is wrong to deny that. The huge problem with this is that when services are denied because the school does not observe the disorder, the child’s disorder may have devastating effects.  Children with Autism may have meltdowns; children with ADHD may be distracted in classes; children with Auditory Processing Disorder may become disoriented or frightened; children with Krohn’s Disease may become exhausted; etc.  Once this occurs, access to education is impeded.  This is exactly what IDEA, 504, ADA, and other laws are designed to prevent. 3. Schools may respond that they don’t witness how the disability impacts the education, but they also don’t see the aftermath when the child arrives home. While it is true that under IDEA and 504, there are two parts to the question: (a) does the child have a diagnosis that fits them within an eligibility category? and (b) does the child need special education and related services or accommodations because of the disability?  20 U.S.C. 1401(3)(A); 29 U.S.C. 794. However, children have amazing capacity to overcome their disabilities.  In colloqual terms, they can “hold it together” during school hours, but then come home and “let it all out”.  Children know home is their “safe space” and if anxiety, frustration, fear, depression, anger, or similar emotions build up during the school day because the disability is not being recognized by the school, the parents must bear the brunt of those released emotions in the home. In fact, the U.S. Department of Education issued a guidance letter that states “IDEA and the regulations clearly establish that the determination about whether a child is a child with a disability is not limited to information about the child’s academic performance.”  USDOE Guidance, Letter to Clarke (2007).  That means behavior should also be considered – whether in school or in the home, because remember a parent is a critical member of the IEP team.  20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(1)(B)(i). Conclusion Schools should not reject a child’s diagnosis made by a licensed physician because (1) it is unlikely that an IEP team member is a physician; (2) just because they can’t “see” the disability doesn’t mean it’s not there; and (3) they need to consider all effects of the disability, including behaviors at home triggered by the failure to address the issues at school. If a school rescinds services to your child under an IEP or takes away the IEP because they don’t believe your child has a disability, contact a special education lawyer ASAP.  

Why Special Education Due Process Cases Are NOT Full-Blown Lawsuits

School board attorneys have managed to turn special education due process hearings into all-out, scorched Earth lawsuits, as if it was Microsoft vs. IBM.  In fact, they have convinced administrative hearing officers and judges that this is the way it should be.

But Due Process cases are not supposed to be full-blown litigation.  Here are 5 reasons why:

1. Timing.  Most civil lawsuits take more than a year to go to trial; in some states they can take up to 5 years before they go to trial.  This is why IDEA law requires cases to take no more than 75 days from complaint to decision20 U.S.C. §1415(f) (30 days resolution period + 45 days for hearing officer to issue a decision); see also 34 C.F.R. §300.515.  If a special education problem lingers too long, a child is missing out on his/her education.  Can you imagine if a case lasted 5 years?  The child would go from 3rd grade to 8th grade with no help.  Congress never intended this to happen.

2. Discovery. Civil litigation follows the Rules of Civil Procedure, which include discovery (getting documents, asking questions through interrogatories or depositions, and inspections of places).  By contrast, “discovery” in Due Process cases is informal.  In fact, the  hearing is the opportunity to get discovery, not before.  See 20 U.S.C. §1415(h); 34 C.F.R. §300.512.

3. Relief.  If you file a civil suit against someone in a court of law, you are seeking money.  Microsoft wants $10 billion from IBM.  In a special education case, you want your student with a disability to get a Free Appropriate Public Education.  In other words, you want the school to start teaching and being fair to your child.  See 20 U.S.C. §1415(i)(2)(C)(iii) (“shall grant such relief as the court determines is appropriate”); 34 C.F.R. §300.516(c)(3).  [Most courts have interpreted this provision to include an administrative hearing officer.]

4. Executive Branch. Civil lawsuits are conducted in courts of law – that means, the judicial branch of government.  See, e.g., Article III, U.S. Constitution.  Due process cases are conducted by an administrative hearing officer appointed by your state’s Department of Education.  20 U.S.C. §1415(f)(3)(A); 34 C.F.R. §300.511(c).  They are executive branch officers; not a court of law.

5. Fairness.  When two parties battle it out in a civil lawsuit, we presume there is a balance of power between them.  Justice is determined by the evidence.  In special education cases, Congress acknowledged that the parents are at a legal disadvantage20 U.S.C. §1400(d)(1)(b) (“The purposes of IDEA are . . . to ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and parents of such children are protected”); 34 C.F.R. §300.1(b).  Most parents are not lawyers, don’t have any legal training, nor have the financial resources like school districts and state governments.  IDEA attempts to level the playing field.

Conclusion

If the lawyer for the school district involved in your special education dispute is trying to turn your case into Microsoft vs. IBM, fight back against their tactics and let the hearing officer know that due process  hearings are not supposed to be all-out litigation war.

If you need the assistance of an attorney who will push back against these school district counsel tactics, then contact SchoolKidsLawyer.com.

 

Public Schools Have Made Your Child the Enemy and You, the Taxpayer, Are Funding Their Battle – Part II (A Case Study)

An Open Letter to the Williamson County (TN) School Board and Williamson County (TN) Commission from a Concerned Parent . . .

[Reprinted with permission.  Names withheld to protect the identity of the child.]

 

Dear County Commissioners and School Board Members,

I am writing regarding a resolution that both the Williamson County School Board and the County Commission are being asked to approve. The resolution includes amending the 2017-2018 general purchase school budget so that $575,000 can be used for legal fees for special education due process cases The resolution is attached. I am asking the School Board and the County Commission to ask two important questions before voting on this resolution:

1) How many special education due process cases is this $575,000 in legal fees being used for?

2) What was the total amount of money that these parents were asking Williamson County Schools to pay in their due process claim(s)?

If the $575,000 in legal fees surpasses the amount that Williamson County Schools was asked to pay the parents in the first place, as a taxpayer, I encourage you to ask district leaders additional questions.

I am a parent of one of the current special education due process cases against Williamson County Schools and because of this know information that you may not be aware of. Over the years of raising four children there have been times where one of them was struggling but wasn’t ready to talk about it. In some of those instances I remember encouraging them to share with me and telling them that I can’t help what I don’t know. I too believe that people who are elected to serve the community can’t help what they don’t know and it is with that in mind that I write to you today.

In the last five years Williamson County Schools used $570,000 of the taxpayer’s money to pay The Law Office of Melinda Jacobs to fight special education due process cases. As a taxpayer, I am alarmed at the amount of money I see Williamson County Schools spending in our one small claim. I believe that Williamson County Schools is easily on their way to spend more in legal fees with The Law Office of Melinda Jacobs and their expert witnesses to fight our claim prior to the first day of trial than the amount of money I am asking to be reimbursed. My claim is only for the special education services I paid for and not a penny more. Here are just a few of many examples that make me concerned about how tax dollars are being spent.

There is a large amount of taxpayer money being spent on unnecessary depositions. The Law Office of Melinda Jacobs is spending more days doing depositions than the total number of days allotted for our entire trial. They are deposing at least 21 of our people and are flying to New York, California and Missouri to depose providers that only spent a few hours with my child. Some of the people they are deposing didn’t even provide services during the time period of this due process claim so are irrelevant to the case.

There is a large amount of taxpayer money being spent on unnecessary expert witnesses. Williamson County Schools hired two expert witnesses which will likely cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars. They hired David Rostetter to observe my son in his private school in April of 2018 even though our case is for the 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 school years. If Mike Looney and Carol Hendlmyer expect you to approve this they should have to explain to you how an observation in April of 2018 is relevant and necessary especially when there were already reports from a Williamson County School psychologist and a Williamson County School special education teacher who observed my child in this private school when developing the 2015/2016 IEP.

I encourage you to ask Mike Looney and Carol Hendlmyer how much money Williamson County Schools have paid their expert David Rostetter in the past and how much they anticipate paying him in our case and compare that figure alone to the amount of our claim. I think you will find it alarming. In addition, you might want to ask if there are any concerns with David Rostetter’s ability to conduct an observation being that he has been legally blind since the age of 12.

There is a large amount of taxpayer money being spent on other unnecessary attorney fees. Williamson County Schools paid for THREE attorneys from The Law Office of Melinda Jacobs as well as several school employees to go to a mediation for our case when they had zero intentions of settling the case that day. Did the taxpayers really need to pay for three lawyers and several Williamson County School employees that day when they already knew that they were not going to even attempt to settle the case

In addition, I would encourage the School Board or the County Commission to speak to Melinda Jacobs or another attorney special education attorney about the merits of the special education due process cases before approving this money.

In closing, over the last five years Williamson County Schools used $570,000 of taxpayer’s money (126 pages of invoices) to pay The Law Office of Melinda Jacobs to fight special education due process cases. More money may have been paid to other law firms as well. Now, they are asking you, us, for $575,000 more.

Last month Williamson County taxpayers, 8,155 of them, voted for a sales tax increase to fund Williamson County Schools. I would have to think that a large number of them would not have voted the way they did if they were aware of the amount of money that is being wasted on special education due process legal fees. Mike Looney and Carol Hendlmyer have not been good stewards of taxpayer dollars in regards to these legal fees and your oversight is needed to avoid the mistakes that other districts have made. Take a look at the actions of another Tennessee county in the Deal v Hamilton County TN Bd of Ed (6th Cir 2004) where the district spent $2.3 million to fight and lose a special education due process case that they could have settled for $150,000:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2005/3/14/63675/Atlanta-Law-Firm-Charges-To-County.aspx

At one point, Melinda Jacobs, the attorney Williamson County Schools is using against us, worked for The Weatherly Law Firm who was the law firm for the school district in this case. David Rostetter, the expert witness Williamson County Schools is using against us was one of the expert witnesses in this case and was paid $74,632.47 for his testimony. Melinda Jacobs who has practiced in Knoxville since 1999 opened up a second location here in Franklin on August 15, 2016.

How much more of Williamson County taxpayer’s money is she expecting to make this second location worth her while? Would her other clients pay to put her up in expensive hotels like the Franklin Marriott as Williamson County Schools does? Again, your oversight is needed.

Evaluations vs. IEP Meetings – A Very Important Distinction

A client recently told me they received a notice for an “evaluation meeting”.  Huh?  I asked, do you mean an IEP meeting?  The client wasn’t sure because the notice said just that – evaluation meeting.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN EVALUATION MEETING!

Since I figured school districts are trying to confuse parents by using the terms “evaluation” and “IEP meeting” interchangeably, let me clarify the difference between the two for everybody.

What the law says

IDEA is very specific about what an “evaluation” is and what an “IEP meeting” is.  And they are in separate sections of the statute.  Here is what that law says:

Evaluation, 20 U.S.C. §1414(a), (b), and (c)

Initial evaluation: “A State educational agency, other State agency, or local educational agency shall conduct a full and individual initial evaluation . . . before the initial provision of special education and related services to a child with a disability under this subchapter.”  20 U.S.C. §1414(a)(1).

In other words, before a student can receive special education and related services for the first time, the school must conduct an initial evaluation of the child.  This is part of their “Child Find” responsibility if someone suspects that the child has a disability that impacts their education.

The next few subsections discuss the procedures used and the purpose of an initial evaluation (“to determine [eligibility]  within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation”) and parental consent.

Reevaluation: “A local educational agency shall ensure that a reevaluation of each child with a disability is conducted . . . if the local educational agency determines that the educational or related services needs, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, of the child warrant a reevaluation; or if the child’s parents or teacher requests a reevaluation.” 20 U.S.C. §1414(a)(2).

Thus, re-evaluation of a child must occur if the school believes a change in services is necessary or if a parent or teacher requests it.  Here is a very important part:

Reevaluation MUST occur at least every three (3) years, but not more than once a year, unless the parents and school agree that reevaluation is not necessary.

20 U.S.C. §1414(a)(2)(B).

What does an evaluation involve? “In conducting the evaluation, the local educational agency shall use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information, including information provided by the parent (to determine if there is a disability and what will be necessary in an IEP); shall not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining (disability or the education program); and use technically sound instruments that may assess the relative contribution of cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental factors.”  20 U.S.C. §1414(b)(2).

What the heck does all that mean?

It means that the school must use valid testing methods and get input from the parents and others who know the child in performing the evaluation.  The school can’t simply rely on what the teachers say.

This is where the trouble starts, because schools think that they can conduct an “evaluation” or “reevaluation” by simply having a meeting.  They can’t.

Let’s continue.

IEP Meeting, 20 U.S.C. §1414(d)

IEP Meeting:  The IEP Team (parents, at least 1 gen ed teacher who knows the child, at least 1 special ed teacher who knows the child, a representative of the school district who knows the resources available, a person who can interpret evaluation results, and possibly others) must assemble to develop an IEP for the child.  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(1)(B) and (C).  This is an IEP meeting.

The Team must meet to ensure that an IEP is in effect for each child with a disability in the school district by the beginning of the school year in the Fall.  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(2)(A).    The IEP meeting must occur “periodically, but not less frequently than annually, to determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved.”  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(4)(A).

So, hopefully you’re still with me.  And you can see that the law is crystal clear that an evaluation is something different than an IEP meeting.

So why are schools getting this mixed up (maybe on purpose)?

One sentence in IDEA may be the culprit:

“To the extent possible, the local educational agency shall encourage the consolidation of reevaluation meetings for the child and other IEP Team meetings for the child.”  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(3)(E).

The statute doesn’t explain what a “reevaluation meeting” is, but I think it refers back to the section quoted in Reevaluation above, namely a meeting to determine if a reevaluation is needed.  It is not a meeting where an evaluation takes place, but rather to decide if one is necessary.

Nevertheless, ASK the school what they mean by an “evaluation meeting”.  Ask them if they mean a meeting to decide whether reevaluation is necessary or if they mean an IEP meeting or a combined meeting.  And, as always, DO IT IN WRITING!

If you want further information on this, get our book SchoolKidsLawyer’s Step-By-Step Guide to Special Education Law or contact us for a consultation.

 

 

Put Communications Between Teachers and Parents in the IEP

A new tactic being used by schools against parents of children with disabilities is to require / funnel all communications with the school through one person, usually the case manager.  We’ve seen numerous questions by parents if this is illegal or whether parents can request two-way communication be listed as an accommodation in the IEP.

Yes it is, yes it can and it should be.

But you won’t find the requirement in IDEA.  You’ll find it in ESSA.  Read on.

Not in IDEA

IDEA does not have a requirement or regulation that says that there should be ongoing communication between teachers and parents of children with disabilities.  Probably because Congress felt that such communication was basic common sense and they wouldn’t need to actually write it into a law.

What IS in IDEA is the following:

IDEA guarantees parents and their child with a disability numerous legal rights identified as “Procedural Safeguards”.  See 20 U.S.C. §1415; 34 C.F.R. §§300.500-520.  The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it is not only the child with the disability that has legal rights under IDEA, but the parents are also entitled to assert legal rights on their own behalf under IDEA.  Winkelman v. Parma City School Dist., 550 U.S. 516, 127 S.Ct. 1994, 1996 (2007).

One of the key Procedural Safeguards is “an opportunity for the parents of a child with a disability . . . to participate in meetings with respect to the identification, evaluation, and educational placement of the child.”  20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(1); 34 C.F.R. §300.501(b)(1) (emphasis added.)  The parents of a child with a disability are mandatory members of the IEP Team.  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(1)(B)(i); 34 C.F.R. §300.321(a)(1).  Indeed, “the concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child” is critical in developing the child’s IEP.  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(3)(A)(ii); 34 C.F.R. §300.324(a)(1)(ii); see also Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988); Schaffer v. Weast, 546 U.S. 49, 53, 126 S.Ct. 528, 163 L.Ed.2d 387 (2005) (Parents play “a significant role” in the development of each child’s IEP.)

Parental participation in an IEP meeting is so vital, it is set forth twice in the IDEA regulations.  34 C.F.R. §§300.322(a), (c) and (d) (emphasis added); 34 C.F.R. §300.501(b)(1).

But that is all concerning parental participation in the development of an IEP.  These provisions don’t discuss the daily, ongoing communication with the school.

Now, we look at ESSA . . .

ESSA

In 2017, Congress passed and President Trump signed the Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. §6301 et seq. (2017) (“ESSA”).  This was an amendment of the prior No Child Left Behind Act (“NCLB”).

The ESSA guarantees parents of a child with a disability to participate “in regular, two-way, and meaningful communication involving student academic learning and other school activities” and “play an integral role in assisting their child’s learning.” To accomplish that goal, parents are “encouraged to be actively involved in their child’s education at school . . . [and carry] out of other activities, such as those described in section 1116.” 20 U.S.C. §7801(39) (emphasis added.)

The activities referenced in “section 1116” state that parents may engage in to participate in their child’s education include, inter alia, ongoing communications between teachers and parents and classroom observation. 20 U.S.C. §6318(d) (emphasis added.)

Put Two-Way Ongoing Communication in Your Child’s IEP

Thus, since Congress deemed this so important that they wrote it into law, it is important enough to make it part of your child’s IEP.  Show them the law quoted above.  (Maybe even print out this article and bring it to the IEP meeting.)  Tell them that you want this accommodation written into the IEP, especially if the school is trying to deny this right of access.

I’m quite sure that even teachers would welcome such ongoing dialogue.  The key is not to abuse this right – don’t contact the teachers several times every day.  Be reasonable as teachers have other students and their parents to meet this obligation.  But, if you do so reasonably, there is no legal basis for a school to block such regular and common sense communication.

It’s no longer just common sense – it’s now the law.

 

Public Schools Have Made Your Child the Enemy and You, the Taxpayer, Are Funding Their Battle

You pay federal taxes.  You have schools in your town.  Those schools have special education programs.  If you’re reading this blog, you’re probably a parent of a child with special needs.

Well, guess what?  If you have a dispute with your school about your child’s IEP or otherwise not meeting your child’s special education needs, YOU are paying for the school to fight against you and your child.

Guess what else? Even if you don’t have a child with special needs or don’t even have a child in the school district, YOU are still paying to have the school fight against the child with a disability and his/her family.

Yes, you heard that right.  YOU are paying to fight against children with disabilities in your community – maybe your own child.

Let me explain this in greater detail and why the system should change.

Federal Funding For Schools

The federal law known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§1400 et seq. or “IDEA” protects students with disabilities and guarantees they receive an appopriate education from their local schools.  This is accomplished and enforced through a federal funding mechanism within IDEA.  If a state receives federal funding for its schools, it must provide special education and related services to children with disabilities in its public schools.  20 U.S.C. § 1412.

In other words, some of the federal taxes you pay goes to fund special education and related services for students with disabilities.  You probably don’t object to ensuring a wheelchair-bound child can access the school via ramps or a child with diabetes having access to the school nurse to administer insulin shots.  You also likely don’t object to a chid with a learning disability receiving extra help in the classroom so they can achieve with their non-disabled peers.

YOU don’t object . . . but the schools are.

Where Does the Funding Go?

Those federal funds for special education – your tax dollars – are supposed to be used to assess if children have disabilities and evaluate their needs, prepare Individualized Education Programs or “IEPs” with special education adn related services to meet those needs, and decide the best location to provide those services for the child.  20 U.S.C. §1414.  Just as non-disabled children can get their education at their local public school for free, the goal of IDEA is to provide the same for children with disabilities, called a Free Appropriate Public Education or “FAPE”.  20 U.S.C. §1401(9).

Still sounds pretty reasonable, right?

How Does A School Make Sure It Provides a FAPE?

Schools are supposed to ensure a child with a disability provides a FAPE via two main mechanisms: (1) assembling an IEP team; and (2) ensuring that the rights of the child are protected and the parents are active participants in enforcement of those rights.  Tax dollars pay for schools to assemble an IEP team, which consists of the child’s parents (and the child if appropriate) and several key school personnel, to discuss how best to provide FAPE for the child with a disability.  20 U.S.C. §1414(d)(1).  States and schools must also put procedures in place to secure the legal rights of the child with a disability and his/her parents.  20 U.S.C. §1415.

This is where the system usually breaks down.  Because the parents and the school staff don’t alawys agree on how the IEP is developed or what services are provided to the child with a disability.  Thereby, a dispute arises.

How IDEA Addresses Special Education Disputes – The Problem

IDEA provides mechanisms to address these special education disputes between parents and schools.  If a school wants to do something with which the parents don’t agree or if the school doesn’t want to do something the parents have suggested, the school can issue a Prior Written Notice or “PWN”.  20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(3) and (c)(1).  Parents can review their child’s education records kept by the school as a check on whether the school is providing a FAPE.  20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(1).

There are other “Procedural Safeguards” in IDEA, but none that causes as many problem as a party’s right to file a complaint challenging the “identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child” a/k/a a “Due Process Complaint.”  20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(6) and (f).

Why is this a problem?  Well, anytime lawyers get involved, there’s a problem, right? [He says half-jokingly, half-seriously.]  Each party to a Due Process case has “the right to be accompanied and advised by counsel.”  20 U.S.C. §1415(h)(1).

Still not a bad thing until you realize who is paying the school district’s lawyer’s bill.  The answer is . . . you probably guessed it . . . YOU ARE!

Paying For The School District’s Lawyer

That’s correct.  Whether attorney’s fees are paid directly by the school district’s Board of Education or through insurance (which is purchased using school budget money), the source of the money paid to the lawyers fight against your child with a disability is tax dollars.  YOUR tax dollars.

Schools are misdirecting funds intended to provide education to children with disabilities by spending it on legal bills or insurance to fight special education cases.

So what does that mean?  It means YOU, the taxpayer, are paying for the attorney sitting across the table from you and representing the school district.  The harder the school district lawyer fights, the more YOU are paying him/her.  The school district never has the incentive to resolve the dispute because they’re not truly paying the bill.

Now, I don’t know if you have ever been in a lawsuit before, but if you have, you know what a financial burden it is to pay a lawyer.  You have the incentive to get it over as quickly as possible because, in all likelihood, you are not Bank of America (or Citibank or Goldman Sachs or some other big bank).  But if you didn’t have to pay for your lawyer, you’d fight to the ends of the Earth, right?  That’s how the school district views it.

Not What IDEA Was Designed To Do

IDEA was not set up to favor the school districts.  In fact, IDEA was designed by Congress to “level the playing field” so that parents had a stronger role in the education of their child with a disability.  Specifically, Congress stated: “The purposes of [IDEA] 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; to ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and parents of such children are protected; and to assist States, localities, educational service agencies, and Federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities” among other goals.  20 U.S.C. §1400(d)(1).

IDEA was meant to improve collaboration and cooperation between schools and parents to help children with disabilities receive better education.  Certainly, Congress did not intend for states and schools to use federal funds to wage bitter lawsuit wars against parents and their children with disabilities.

But that is what it has become.  Ask any of my colleagues at COPAA.

So What Can You Do About It? – TAKE ACTION!

If you are like me and fed up with this system of injustice and abuse of taxpayer money, you can take action.  What school districts and their attorneys don’t want you to know is that because the source of funds paying the lawyer fees is public tax money, they MUST disclose such payments to the public who are paying those taxes.

In other words, if you live in a school district that is waging a special education war against a child with a disability, you have the RIGHT to know how much the school is paying its lawyers.

How do you find this out?  You make a Freedom of Information Act or “FOIA” request (or your state’s version of FOIA; for example, in New Jersey it is called the Open Public Records Act or OPRA).

Each state has a website for FOIA requests (I’ve listed a few below as examples) and usually a form to fill out.  On the form ask to see “All fees and costs paid to lawyers by XYZ Schooll District for special education disputes or legal disputes under IDEA for the last 5 years” or something similar.  Prepare for a fight, but you have the lawful right to that information as long as you live in XYZ School District.

New Jersey OPRA Records Request Website and Form

Florida Public Records Act Website and Forms

Texas Open Records Requests Website and Forms

Pennsylvania Open Records Request Website and Forms

For those not listed here, Google “[Your state] FOIA request” and look for an official state website URL.

Go get ’em!

What is a “reasonable accommodation”?

Recently I was asked to explain what a “reasonable accommodation” is.

The person put the question in some context:   Their child’s “special education school thinks a table in classroom with curtain is a reasonable accommodation for his bathroom needs. The class is coed teenagers with different cognitive and physical abilities.”

I doubt this is a “reasonable accommodation”, but let’s explore how we get there.

504 and ADA, not IDEA

First, “reasonable accommodation” is 504  and ADA language, not IDEA.  Under IDEA, a school must develop an IEP that meets all needs of a student with a disability.  This is not an ‘accommodation’; rather it is a legal requirement so that a child may receive a FAPE.

What does 504 require?

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (504 for short) is a federal law that prohibits a  facility that receives federal funds from discriminating against a person with a disability.  Under 504, a public school must ensure that a child with a disability has equal access to education and services.  To accomplish that, the school must provide modifications to education and services or a “reasonable accommodation” to such student so that he/she is not discriminated against because of his/her disability.

What does the ADA require?

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is very similar to 504 and applies to schools equally.  The purpose is to prevent and prohibit discrimination against students with disabilities, so it requires the same as 504.

How is “reasonable accommodation” defined?

Unfortunately, neither 504, ADA, nor their regulations define this specific term.  We know from caselaw that schools are required to make reasonable accommodations according to a person’s disability unless such changes would fundamentally alter the nature of the school’s purpose, i.e. providing educational services.

There are obvious accommodations like making sure there is wheelchair access to all parts of the school for a student confined to a wheelchair.  There are slightly less obvious accommodations like assigning a staff member or student to assure that child in a wheelchair can get out of the building in case of fire or a fire drill.   But this is still reasonable.

Types of “reasonable accommodations”

There are several types of accommodations already determined to be reasonable.  They fall under categories.

a. Accessibility: This includes the wheelchair example above and a special needs bus or transportation.

b. Service Animals: For children who need the assistance of a service animal, schools must allow access to accommodate that child’s needs.

c. Interpreters: Access to sign language interpreters or hearing aids for those who have hearing disabilities or access to other interpretors like Braile materials or interpreters when a child with a disability does not speak English.

d. Auxiliary Aids and Services: A school may need to provide a medical plan or extra access to a nurse for a child with diabetes, epilepsy, or other illness requiring medication and/or monitoring during the school day. Or perhaps a child’s disability requires a smaller classroom, less noise, less distraction, different lighting, etc.

e. Removal of Barriers: If doors or stairways or other typical structural aspects of the school are a barrier to a child with a disability, the school must find alternate ways to accommodate that student.

There are several others, but these are the major categories in which schools must provide accommodations.

Is the accommodation reasonable?

Reasonableness is going to be determined by what the disability is and how it interferes with the child’s access to educational services.  So, accommodation may be decided on a  case-by-case basis, but, again, can’t change the fundamental purpose of the school.

Some guidelines (not legal advice):

– Identify your child’s specific needs

– Suggest an accommodation (don’t necessarily rely on the school to design one themselves, as it may not be appropriate)

– If the school finds your suggestion unreasonable, ask them to state why

– Ask the school to suggest an accommodation

– Provide medical documentation if appropriate

– Ask the school to respond to request in a reasonable time

Is the bathroom example in the question reasonable?

Although the person did not reveal what the disability of the child is, a desk in a room with other children with a curtain does not seem reasonable for numerous reasons: anxiety of the child because of the location; potential health risks because of unsanitary conditions; and may not appropriately address the need of the child.

Final word

Follow the guidelines above (and think of more yourself) to determine a reasonable accommodation that the school should make in order for your child with a disability to access the educational services.  If the accommodation that the school provides seems shocking or inappropriate, it is not likely reasonable.