Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 0
INTRODUCTION Each year, school districts, educators, and parents face the challenge of how to navigate the Individualized Education Program (or IEP) process. As a parent, misinformation and /or miseducation about your role, rights and responsibilities can be the difference between a child meeting with success in school or facing a lifetime of challenges. As educators, making sure that parents understand their role, rights, and responsibilities is an ethical and legal imperative.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview of this Manual …………………………………………………………………
3
Introduction of the Problem ………………………………………………………………
4
IEP’s as a HOT TOPIC …………………………………………………………………..
6
Why we need IEP Training .……………………………………………………………..
7
Case Study 1 - Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1 ……………………..
9
Case Study 2 - York School Department v. Maine State Educational Agency …………… 11 Case Study 3 - J.L, on behalf of the minor child T.D. v Board of Trustees of the North Star Academy Charter School, Essex County ……………………… 13 Case Study 4 - Doug C. v. State of Hawaii Department of Education …………………… 15 Case Study 5 - M.M. v. San Ramon Valley Unified School District ……………………... 17 Parents and the IEP Process: Making it Work …………………………………………… 20 Suggestions for IEP Success ……………………………………………………………… 23 Addressing the Problem of Practice: Resources and How to Use Them ………………… 25 References………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 2
OVERVIEW OF THIS MANUAL This manual is designed for general and special education teachers, administrators, and staff who are responsible for communicating with parents about better understanding their role in the special education process. Additionally, it provides information regarding the laws associated with how the special education student population is served. This manual focuses the parents’ role, rights, and responsibilities in the IEP process. Its purpose is (1) to familiarize readers with special education law that governs a child’s education in the public school system, (2) to focus on parents’ rights and responsibilities under special education law, and (3) to provide a foundation that helps parents participate in the special education process as an advocate for the child. The manual is broken down in the following parts:
introduction of the problem related case studies making the IEP process work resources “Parents Need to Know” caption boxes with information1
The contents of this manual have been developed as a part of the Legislation and Implementation of Policy and Procedure course at Wilmington University. Policy of the US Department of Education and the Federal Government should be referenced to inform and assist parents and students regarding disability issues, including the education rights of students in special education.
1
Adopted from: Pacer Center (2019). Parent Special Education Information. Retrieved from https://www.pacer.org/parent/
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 3
INTRODUCTION OF THE PROBLEM Before a discussion of the IEP process and parents’ roles, rights, and responsibilities, there is a need to understand the law that governs special education and its key provisions. Until the 1970s, students with disabilities were often excluded from public school. Courts and Congress have addressed this exclusion. The federal and state laws that help students with disabilities attend school include the U.S. and state constitutions, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Each of these laws independently protects students with disabilities (Michigan Protection and Advocacy Service, 2019). In 1975, Congress enacted the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA. The law and the regulations required that a free appropriate public education (FAPE) would be available for all children with disabilities ages 3 through 21. In 1983, those programs under the Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA) were amended and in 1986 the law was reauthorized and amended. In 1990, the name of the Act was changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Harrison, 2016). Writing a student’s Individual Education Plan (IEP) takes place within the larger context of the special education process under IDEA. Before writing the IEP there must be an understanding of how a student is identified as having a disability and needing special education and related services. It is important that parents understand this process so that they can make an informed decision about their child actually needing an IEP (US Department of Education, nd). The notion of an informed decision has been the basis of many of the cases that have come before courts throughout the United States. Not only are parents unable to make an informed decision about what their child needs, they are often at a deficit because they have limited Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 4
knowledge of the process, the law, their roles, and outcomes associated with and IEP. For every parent who has a successful IEP meeting, there are more that do not have this experience. According to Burke (2013) parents and students are less involved in mapping out a plan, despite the fact that the federal law mandates on-going involvement in formulating an IEP. Why are some parents left out of the process? The following are some of the outliers that impact parental involvement:
difficulty scheduling meetings for parents who have to work inability to agree on services (agreement between team members and parents) use of uncommon terminology (e.g. the IEP team uses jargon or technical terms that are unfamiliar to parents, often leaving the parent feeling too embarrassed to as for clarity) judgement and barriers faced by low-income families (who often have the worst outcomes in IEP meetings) (Burke, 2013).
There is a moral and legal obligation to provide students with special needs the services they need and in this process, the absence of parental involvement leads to the development of ineffective IEPs and leaves students vulnerable and lacking much needed services.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 5
IEPS AS A HOT TOPIC The reason IEPs are a hot topic is because they are often the cause of a number of noncompliance problems. Non-compliance can happen if an IEP was not calculated to provide educational benefit to the student, if the goals and objectives were not set up so that they were measurable, or if levels of academic achievement were not aligned with goals, assessments, or services provided (Achievement Products, 2013). These are just a few of the most common errors. In addition to the structure and delivery of the actual IEP are issues directly related to parent-teacher interaction during the IEP process. These parent-teacher issues deal mainly with providing parents with meaningful opportunities to engage in meetings, failure to notify parents of team meetings in a timely manner, setting up meetings in a place that is not mutually agreed upon, or not addressing a parents request to schedule another meeting after the IEP was not agreed upon and signed. All of these problems lead to compliance issues and more importantly cost school districts millions of dollars in litigation and personnel resources. In the state of California the Los Angeles Unified School District held 4,253 administrative hearings between 2010 and 2013 and the three largest school districts (San Francisco, Oakland Unified, and San Jose Unified), spent nearly 2 million dollars on outside counsel to deal with special education lawsuits (Nguyen, Villarreal, Paredes, and Nious, 2013).
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 6
WHY WE NEED IEP TRAINING FOR PARENTS Simply put; it is the law. However, this does not always happen and parents do not truly understand the resources that are available to them once they have discovered that their child is entitled to special services once it is determined that the student has one (or more) of the thirteen disabilities as covered under IDEA. According to Regulation 34 C.F.R. 300.320(a)(4) Subsection (c)(8) defines parent counseling and training as: “(i)… assisting parents in understanding the special needs of their child; (ii) Providing parents with information about child development; and (iii) Helping parents to acquire the necessary skills that will allow them to support the implementation of their child’s IEP or IFSP” (Bardet, 2019).
In lay terms, this means that when parents and educators have the services they need to support a child with disabilities they are able to do so more efficiently. Additionally, parents should have assistance acquiring the skills that will help them to support the implementation of their child’s IEP and this assistance should come from well-trained teachers. In the same vein, parents need to learn how to be more active participants in a child’s special education journey. This means that parents need to make use of supportive school personnel and parent training. It is difficult to be an advocate if you do not know what you are advocating for.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 7
CASE STUDY OVERVIEW Case studies provide opportunities for inductive reasoning, critical thinking and enable users to apply what is learned in real world situations. The use of case law summaries provide the user with the same insight. This manual includes five (5) case studies that detail violations in the delivery of an IEP as outlined by IDEA. In most instances, the parents requested additional services, alternatives or were just not happy with the proposed IEP or the situation in question. Each case studies follows the format:
case background legal issues identified legal reasoning & rule of law
The overarching theme in these case studies rests in the fact that as a special education teacher, one of the biggest challenges is the fact that while special education teachers truly need to have an understanding of the law, providing these opportunities for teachers to capture this knowledge can be a challenge. In many instances the source of information for both parents and teachers usually comes from others in the school who also lack knowledge; which increases the chances of potentially passing on misinformation. Parent education as well as teacher education by a trained profession, can reduce the amount of misinformation regarding laws and policy that drive the delivery of services in the special education arena. Knowledge makes the system work better for our students and parents and protects teachers and school districts against litigation that can be lengthy and financially burdensome on the school district. Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 8
CASE STUDY 1 Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1
year in school, as they believed that it was basically the same as the previous IEPs under which their child’s academic and
According to O’Conner, Yasik, and Horner
functional progress had stalled. Their
(2016), while there is limited research on
decision was to place the child in a private
teacher training around special education
school that focused on educating students
law (at the undergraduate level and at the
with autism. The parents noted significant
entry-level in the field) it would stand to
improvements in their child and felt as if the
reason that professional development in this
child was able to meet agreed upon goals. A
area would be significant as the teachers are
problem arose for the Endrew’s when they
taking on more substantial roles of
sought a reimbursement for the private
identification and teaching students with
school education at a due process hearing.
special needs. The importance of this
When denied, they sought a judicial review
training is evident in the case of Endrew F.
of the hearing decision in the US District
v. Douglas County School District Re-1.
Court of Colorado, which also denied the
Case Background
Endrew family’s request. The Endrew’s took
The child at the center of this litigation was
their case to the US Court of Appeals for the
a student with autism who had been
Tenth Circuit, which ruled that the child had
educated in the public school system since
indeed received FAPE through the IEPs as
the fourth grade. In 2010, Endrew’s parents
they were calculated to provide the student
did not approve of the IEP that was issued
with an educational benefit that was de
prior to the start of their child’s fifth grade
minimis (or more than trivial or minor
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 9
educational benefits). The parents,
scope of FAPE, the Court reinforced the
unsatisfied with the decision, took the case
requirement that every child should have the
to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court
chance to meet challenging objectives. This
overturned the Tenth Circuit’s decision (US
case proved significant in that the Court had
Department of Education, 2017).
to clarify the law which speaks to the fact
Legal Issues Identified
that a school must offer and IEP that is
Was the Douglas County School District
reasonably calculated to enable a child to
negligent in its calculation of the student’s
make progress appropriate in light of the
ability to make progress and in meeting the
child’s circumstances, which means that a
substantive obligation under the IDEA?
school is responsible for delivering more
Legal Reasoning & Rule of Law
than what is defined by de minimis, as stated
The U.S. Supreme Court stated that to meet
by the Tenth Circuit Court. Additionally,
its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a
this case also spoke to the fact that this
school must offer an IEP reasonably
should be the standard should apply to any
calculated to enable a child to make progress
students with disabilities as defined by the
appropriate based on the child’s
laws (IDEA), regardless of the child’s age or
circumstances. To this end, the Court
current placement (US Department of
rejected the de minimis standard applied by
Education, 2017).
the Tenth Circuit Court. In determining the
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 10
CASE STUDY 2 York School Department v. Maine State Educational Agency
assistance. Although the parent informed the IEP team that she had hired reading and math tutors and was spending several hours each night helping the student to review
Parents have the right to challenge an IEP if
assignments and complete his homework,
the proposed document does not provide
the team did not develop any goals designed
FAPE. This is the issue at the heart of York
to help the student become more
School Department v. Maine State
independent.
Educational Agency.
In 2011, the parents placed the child in
Case Background
private school arguing that the IEPs
Student was eligible for special education
developed in previous years were
and related services due to a specific
inappropriate and that during the 2012-2013
learning disability. The student had below
school an IEP was not put in place until after
average scores in verbal comprehension,
the parents requested due process (Dean,
working memory, and processing speed, but
Eggert, and Minutelli, 2013).
had average results in perceptual reasoning.
Legal Issues Identified
As the student advanced to higher grades,
Were the IEP’s developed by York school
his schoolwork became harder and he began
district reasonably calculated to provide a
to struggle more. Student’s mother worked
free, appropriate public education to the
with the student for at least three hours a
student?
night, three nights per week on reading and math, and hired a tutor to provide additional
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 11
Legal Reasoning & Rule of Law
The school was ordered to reimburse the
The court determined that the school
parents for the costs associated with the
district’s proposed IEPs were not reasonably
private school for the 2011-12 school year
calculated to provide FAPE to the student.
as compensatory services for the failure to
The hearing officer determined that the
provide a FAPE during the 2010-11 and
team’s failure to address the student’s needs
2011-12 school years. In addition, the
with regard to math, organizational skills,
district was ordered to fund the student’s
and independent learning made his IEPs
placement at the private school for the
deficient. The mother made the school
201213 school year because it failed to offer
aware of the problems that the student was
an IEP that was appropriate for student in a
having, but the IEP did not address the
timely fashion.
student’s areas of difficulty. Relying on parents to provide several hours of homework assistance every day outside of school is unreasonable.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 12
CASE STUDY 3 J.L. on behalf of the minor child T.D. v Board of Trustees of the North Star Academy Charter School, Essex County
Case Background A North Star student (T.D.) was suspended from the charter school for an incident that
In Bird and Bassin’s (2014) assessment of
occurred in December 2015, pending a
special education and disciplinary practices,
hearing before North Star’s Board of
they present a case scenario of a 14 year old
Trustees. At the Board hearing, the student’s
African American male student who is
mother requested that the school’s child
placed on in-school suspension several times during his first few months of high school. The scenario is presented as a launching point for a discussion about the need for students to be evaluated for eligibility of special education services in the wake of chronic behavioral issues. In the case that I reviewed, the student was suspended (and had said suspension extended) without consideration of the fact that the parents had requested an evaluation from the child study team. In J.L, on behalf of the minor child T.D. v Board of Trustees of the North Star Academy Charter School, Essex County, due process protections from suspension or expulsion in a charter school was address.
study team evaluate the student to determine eligibility to receive special education services. The Board issued a written decision, suspending T.D. for a total of 56 school days and permitting a return to school on March 22, 2016. The Board also granted T.D.’s mother’s request, agreeing to provide T.D. with a special education evaluation. At the end of T.D.’s suspension, the child study team had completed a portion of the special education evaluation, however the school claimed that as part of the evaluation the child study team required psychiatric clearance, which had not yet been provided. By letter, the Board advised T.D.’s parents that due to the ongoing
The details are as follows: Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 13
special education evaluation, they had
Legal Reasoning & Rule of Law
decided to extend T.D.’s suspension for an
The judge ruled that the suspended students
additional 38 school days, through May 20.
was entitled to a hearing before the Board of
The mother sought council from the
Education and that the continuation of the
Education Law Center. An order granting
suspension was without notice or a hearing.
emergent relief was filed claiming a
Further, the judge asserted that the student
violation of T.D.’s due process rights and
received no intervention and that there was
the fact that the student would suffer
not documentary evidence to reflect consent
irreparable harm if relief was not granted
to the continued suspension. Lastly, the
and the student allowed to return to school
judge ruled that denying the student access
(Education Law Center, 2018).
to school, meant that the student would not
Legal Issues Identified
have access to events, activities or
Did the Board of Trustees of the North Star
interaction with peers or teachers, which
Academy Charter School and the North Star
could not be replaced by continued home
Academy Charter School violate T.D.’s
instruction. The Judge concluded that the
right to due process or his right to a hearing?
continuation of the March 22, 2016 suspension to May 20, 2016 was without merit and should be reversed (Education Law Center, 2016).
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 14
CASE STUDY 4
fact in this case is that on November 9,
Doug C. v. State of Hawaii Department of Education
2009, Kaleo Waiau, the special education coordinator at Maui High School, held an
Failure to include parents in an IEP meeting IEP meeting without the parent, child, or a is a violation of IDEA and while landmark representative from Horizons Academy. The rulings consistently uphold the law, mistakes are still made. In the case of Doug C. v. State of Hawaii Department of Education,
new IEP changed Spencer’s placement to Maui High School. Since the “fifth grade, Spencer’s IEP placed him at a private
consideration of whether the school special education facility, Horizons district’s efforts to include the family in the Academy, at the expense of the Department IEP meeting were sufficient is at the heart of of Education. The date of the IEP meeting this case. had been scheduled and re-scheduled several Case Background times (note: the special education On December 6, 2009, Spencer C.’s coordinator testified that he had asked 13 father, requested a special education due people on three separate occasions to change process hearing against the State of Hawaii their schedules and cancel other Department of Education because Spencer’s commitments to schedule the meeting). The November 9, 2009 IEP meeting was held in Department of Education repeatedly his absence. Doug C. lost at the special suggested that it was difficult to work with education due process hearing and appealed Doug C. and frustrating to schedule to the U. S. District Court. The District meetings with him (United States Court of Court upheld the Hearing Officer. Doug C.
Appeals for the 9th Circuit, nd).
appealed to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed. The key Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 15
The Ninth Circuit stated that central issue
Legal Reasoning and Rule of Law
was whether the Department’s efforts to
Reversing the district court’s judgment, the
include Doug C. in the November IEP
judge held that the Hawaii Department of
meeting were sufficient to meet the
Education violated the Individuals with
requirements of the IDEA. The Court found
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) by
that the failure to include the parent at the
holding a student’s annual individualized
IEP meeting violated the procedural
education program meeting without the
requirement of IDEA and invalidated the
participation of a parent. The Court rules
IEP and that the school was required to
that the Department of Education denied the
include the parents in an IEP meeting unless
student a free appropriate public education
the parent affirmatively refused to attend
by holding the IEP meeting without the
(Wright and Wright, 2013).
parent even though the parent did not
Legal Issues Identified
affirmatively refuse to attend, but rather
Were sufficient efforts put forth by the State
actively sought to reschedule the meeting in
of Hawaii’s Department of Education to
order to participate (United States Court of
include the family in the student’s IEP
Appeals for the 9th Circuit, nd).
meeting and if not was this a clear violation of IDEA?
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 16
CASE STUDY 5 M.M. v. San Ramon Valley Unified School District
school day in a small classroom setting with a student-teacher ratio of no more than six to one. The lead teacher was a certified special
As teachers, understanding why a parents may disagree with an IEP, make additional requests or modifications is important, as the failure to accept the parents/guardian requests can result in litigation. The issue of failing to offer more individualized therapy (as requested by the parents was at the center M.M. v. San Ramon Valley Unified
education teacher and the co-teacher had completed some coursework towards an associate of arts degree. The student received speech and language therapy, had access to assistive technology (AT) services and used an Augmentative and Alternative Communication Device (Dean & Minutelli, 2013).
School District. In 2011, the parents and team came together Case Background
to review the IEP at which time a proposal
The student in this case was a seventh grader
to change student’s placement to a moderate
at Arbor Bay, a private school in California,
special day class with speech-language
and had attended the school since first grade.
therapy services four times a week was
She was eligible for special education
proposed. Additionally, it included the use
services as a result of a speech-language
of an augmentative and alternative
impairment. An IEP was put in place at the
communication (AAC) device for four hours
start of second grade. At Arbor Bay,
per month and then phased down to two
Student received specialized and
hours per month as the staff developed skills
individualized instruction throughout the
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 17
to use student’s AAC device. The IEP also
the least restrictive environment. The
proposed to mainstream student for 20% of
parents appealed (Dean & Minutelli, 2013).
her school day (Dean & Minutelli, 2013). Legal Issues Identified The parents generally agreed with the IEP
Did the San Ramon Valley Unified School
with the following exceptions: 1) student
District fail in terms of providing an IEP that
must remain at Arbor Bay for the 2011-12
was reasonably calculated to provide
school year; 2) student needed speech and
Student with a FAPE.
language therapy at least five times a week; and 3) student needed two hours of use of
Legal Reasoning and Rule of Law
the AAC device per week, not per month.
Once elevated, the Court ruled in favor of
The School District rejected these requests
the parents. The Court found that the School
and offered to place student at Charlotte
District failed to offer the student a FAPE
Wood Middle School with the program and
under the IDEA. The Court found that the
services outlined in the previous IEP
speech-language therapists who had worked
however, the parents rejected this proposal
with the student at Arbor Bay recommended
at the District’s response was to petitioned
at least five units of speech per week, and
to have it implemented over the objection of
two hours of the AAC device per week, and
the parents. The matter went to a hearing at
that student required that level of service to
which time the Hearing Officer ruled in
receive a FAPE. The Court also ruled that
favor of the District, stating that the IEP
the District did not include a specific plan
offered by the District provided a FAPE in
for how it would support student’s speechlanguage deficits during the 20% of the
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 18
school day in which the student would be
communication needs, she required much
mainstreamed, thus there was no way to
more support in social situations. Lastly, the
provide data that would have shown
Court concluded that the District failed to
otherwise. The placement in the other school
establish how the student would benefit
provided no guarantee that the student
from interacting with non-disabled peers and
would receive support when she was
that removing her would be detrimental to
participating in activities and classes with
her social development (Dean & Minutelli,
general education peers (recess, lunch, PE
2013).
and electives), and that due to her
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 19
PARENTS AND THE IEP PROCESS: MAKING IT WORK Parents have been recognized as vital members of the IEP Team since the passage of Public Law 94-142 in 1975. Everyone agrees that parents have an enduring and passionate interest in the well-being and education of their child. It makes perfect sense that Congress would ensure that parents are represented on the IEP Team, front and center. The school must invite the parents to the IEP meeting early enough to ensure that one or both parents have the opportunity to attend and participate. The notice must include:
the purpose of the meeting,
its time, and location, and
who will attend (Center for Parent Information and Resources, 2017).
When parents work with teachers, the impact on the child is powerful. This partnership enables the parent to learn more about their child’s abilities and provides a foundation for mirroring successful tools that are working in the classroom at home. When parents and teachers work together it makes it easier to focus on the learning and attention challenges that the student faces and both parties can share their concerns in an environment that is not defensive or debilitating (Pacer Center, 2019). Additionally, this partnership helps to make teachers better. It allows teachers to feel supported in the process of trying to personalize an approach to learning for the student and the open lines of communication allow a teacher to gain more insight into the student. Most importantly, the shared expectations ensure that both parent(s) and teacher(s) are Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 20
on the same page and this reduced confusion. This can be challenging especially when parents do not feel as if they have the information necessary to advocate for their child. Although parents are equal members on the IEP team, it is not unusual to feel intimidated by the professionals they meet with at IEP meetings. It may be helpful as the educator to remind parents that their role is critically important because of the following factors (Pace Center, 2019):
Parents are the expert on the child and parents often view their children with a wide-angle view of the child. Professionals often see the child through the lens of their particular area of expertise. Parents are the only continuous members on a child’s IEP team and are the one constant factor through multiple transitions at school and in life. Professionals will change from year to year. The parent is the IEP team member who represents and advocates solely for the individual child. School personnel are responsible for many children and must be concerned with meeting all their needs.
To participate meaningfully and effectively as an IEP team member, parents should also know the following responsibilities:
Read the notices, reports and documents the school provides. If a parent doesn’t understand something, they should be encouraged to ask for clarification. Learn the basics of special education and the IEP process. Become familiar with student and parent rights and school responsibilities. Encourage parents to clearly communicate goals and concerns for the child. Help set priorities. Parents should help their child to actively participate in the IEP process as much as is appropriate. Make sure they have the opportunity to communicate their interests, concerns, strengths, and preferences. Become as informed as possible about the child’s school program. Gather information, ask questions and when possible, observe. Listen to and consider other team member’s input. The strength of a team is the different perspectives each member brings. Monitor the child’s progress on IEP goals and provide feedback to the team.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 21
Parents and teachers should remember that the child’s success is the focus of the IEP process. Challenges can be overcome with transparent and consistent communication. Click the link or launch the video below to watch a video about one parent’s journey in the IEP process. Working with Teachers - Advice from a Parent
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 22
SUGGESTIONS FOR IEP SUCCESS (PROPOSED POLICY – THE IEP INCENTIVE PROGRAM) The IEP meeting is somewhat formal. By law, certain people must attend. People sign in to show who is there. Documents are reviewed and passed around. People will talk about the student, his or her needs and strengths, and what type of educational program would be appropriate. Parents should be encouraged to attend, ask questions and offer suggestions and should not feel rushed or uncomfortable in the process. Parents should have ample time to review information and feel fully informed before signing any documents and moving forward with implementation. This sounds straight-forward, but what happens when the parents are a noshow, not prepared, or combative. IEP meetings fail. (Rebhorn, 2017). The law states that there must be parental involvement in the process, however there are barriers to being able to get parents to attend the meetings and one of the major factors is that of parental availability. The proposed policy is likened to the Delawell wellness program in the state of Delaware. This voluntary wellness program available to all benefit-eligible employees and nonMedicare pensioners is administered according to federal rules permitting employer-sponsored wellness programs that seek to improve employee health or prevent disease, including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, as applicable, among others (Delaware Human Resources, 2019). The IEP incentive program would be similar in that parents with children who have IEPs would be required to enroll in this program. This program would afford parents the opportunity to actually accrue leave (instead of having to take paid or unpaid leave) to attend IEP meetings. The program would work as follows, parents would have to submit an entry ticket once their Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 23
meetings are scheduled and after the meeting, they would be issued an exit ticket that they submit to their employers to receive the leave credit. Additionally, parents could use the same entry/exit ticket to receive a gas credit. Parents would have a maximum of six (6) IEP meetings that would fall under the IEP incentive program. Viewing participation in the IEP process from a point of wellness in which parents and IEP team members work together to serve students who are covered under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Acts may be a way to shift the thinking of parents and implement policy that is supportive and views this from a wellness perspective. A more drastic approach to getting parents more involved in the IEP process is to take a similar stance that states and even countries have taken with regard to vaccinations. In these cases; states like New York and countries like Australia have implemented fines for individuals who fail to receive the required vaccinations. In the same vein, parents who refuse to attend IEP meetings would be fined and those fines collected would be used to provide educational support for special education programs. There would of course be limits on how much a state could fine a parent. Ideally, the first approach is probably more welcomed because incentives serve to be more proactive measures in getting people to take action. While everyone will not adhere to the policy even if they are enrolled in IEP incentive program, providing incentives for those parents who are committed to seeing this through increases participation and ultimately increase student success.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 24
ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF PRACTICE: RESOURCES AND HOW TO USE THEM The next section of this manual includes important resources that are user-ready for both parents/advocates and teachers.
The resources include worksheets, videos, and PDF resource
documents.
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 25
RESOURCE #1: Special Education Flow Chart (Pacer Center) Summary: The chart from the Pacer Center (Champions for Children with Disabilities) offers an overview of the special education process. It is not designed to show all steps or the specific details but it do show what happens from the time a child is referred for evaluation and is identified as having a disability, through the development of an individualized education program (IEP). Follow the link to access the full PDF with written details of each step. User/Audience: Parents and Educators Link: https://www.pacer.org/parent/php/PHP-c231.pdf
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 26
RESOURCE #2: Parent-Teacher Conference Worksheet Summary: This worksheet is a resource for both parents and teachers to utilize before attending a conference. Both parties should mark the areas in which the students is excelling () and mark challenge areas with an () so that they can be discussed during the conference. Both parties should make a conscious effort to give each line of the worksheet adequate attention during the meeting. Access the link for the full worksheet. User/Audience: Parents/Educators Link: file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/ParentTeacher%20ConferenceFin.pdf
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 27
RESOURCE #3: Data Tracking Tools for Behavior Summary: Being able to collect data as it relates to a student’s behavior is not only important in terms of helping the students but it provides credible and consistent data that a parent can have access to. The PBIS (positive behavior interventions and supports) website was designed as a resource for school social workers and helps to address behavior through the prevention-oriented structuring of research-based interventions and supports, with the goal of improved behavioral and academic outcomes. PBIS resources are divided into 3 - tiers of increasingly intensive and individualized behavior interventions and supports as well as a system of data collection and analysis. Most useful are the Excel behavior charts which automatically calculate data and provide analysis charts and graphs (a direct link to this document is provided below). Click the link below to access over 60 behavior charts, parent-student surveys, and daily checkin/check-out forms. User/Audience: Parents and Educators
Link to Excel Behavior Chart (choose XLS option to download and save): https://www.scribd.com/document/406588495/PBIS-Daily-Check-in-Sheet Link to Full Website: https://www.pbisworld.com/data-tracking/
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 28
RESOURCE #4: Smart IEPs Summary: The term SMART IEPs describes IEPs that are specific, measurable, use action words, are realistic and relevant, and time-limited. For parents and educators, being able to work together to write goals about what a child should be able to accomplish is important. Parents should not feel as if they are unable to contribute to the goal-writing process because they aren’t educators. Instead, they should be empowered to learn how to craft SMART goals and how to track success based on data. This handout provides a definition for SMART IEP goals, and understanding of level sf academic achievement and performance, and the importance of advising parents about the student’s progress. The document also includes case studies in which SMART goals are used. User/Audience: Parents and Educators
Link: https://www.wrightslaw.com/bks/feta2/ch12.ieps.pdf
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 29
RESOURCE #5: Case Guidelines for Using Benchmarks Summary: The concept of benchmarks was introduced to special education through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 1997) legislation. Prior to this time the term benchmarks has been used in general education in implementing local and state standards. The intent of this document is to clarify definitions and provide examples of benchmarks in general education and in special education and the relationship between the two. Having a better understanding of the benchmarks in the respective areas, parents are better able to help (and follow along) in the IEP process and can make necessary adjustments based on data and measurable knowledge. User/Audience: Parents and Educators Link: http://www.casecec.org/pdf/benchmarks_iep_process.pdf
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 30
RESOURCE #6: Help! I’m going to my First IEP Meeting (Video presentation) Summary: This 11 minute video will help parents to build their confidence as they prepare to attend their first IEP meeting. It’s a step-by-process — you will learn more and more as you move through special education with your child.
User/Audience: Parents Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIywl4OSsoc&feature=youtu.be
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 31
RESOURCE #7: School Accommodations and Modifications Checklist Summary: Understanding the accommodations and modifications that are available to a student is important. Having access to this checklist will help to identify accommodations and modifications necessary to meet the specific needs of the student’s IEP and can be used as a guide as parents and IEP team members discuss the plan. The checklist is not an exhaustive list of modifications and accommodations, however it covers some of the most widely utilized resources used in the classroom. Click the link to access the full checklist. User/Audience: Parents and Educators Link: https://www.pacer.org/parent/php/PHP-c49b.pdf
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 32
RESOURCE #8: How will I Know My Child is Making Progress (Webinar | 40 minutes) Summary: This webinar, moderated by Carolyn Anderson, Senior Advocate and Grants Coordinator at the Pacer Center and Jill O'Gorman, Parent Advocate and Trainer at the Pacer Center, will help parents better understand how to make sense of the learning process at it relates to their child. Additionally, it provides the parents with a guideline for gathering information from special education and general education sources. The video is supplemented by additional links to PDF resources.
User/Audience: Parents Link to Video: https://www.pacer.org/webinars/?webinar_id=47
Link to PDF resources: How Can My Child be involved in the IEP Process? Attending Meetings to Plan Your Child’s IEP Evaluation what does this mean? Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 33
REFERENCES Achievement Products. (2013). Hot topics in special education: Compliance. Retrieved from: https://achievementproducts.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/hot-topic-in-special-educationcompliance/ Bardet, S.J. (2019). Support for school personnel and parent training often overlooked keys to success. Retrieved from: https://www.wrightslaw.com/advoc/articles/support.bardet.htm Bird, J.M. & Bassin, S. (2014). Examining disproportionate representation in special education, disciplinary practices, and the school-to-prison pipeline. Communique. 43:2. 14-16. Burke, Meghan. (2013). Improving parental involvement: Training special education advocates. Journal of Disability Policy Studies. 23. 225-234. 10.1177/1044207311424910. Center for Parent Information and Resources. (2017). Parents on the IEP Team. Retrieved from: https://www.parentcenterhub.org/iep-parents/ Dean B. Eggert, D.B. & Minutelli, A.M. (2013). School law school, the ‘third year’: An
overview of recent decisions. Retrieved from http://www.wadleighlaw.com/wpcontent/uploads/dlm_uploads/2015/02/Special-Education-Case-Law-An-Overview-ofRecent-Decisions-August-2013.pdf
Delaware Human Resources. (2019). Notice Regarding Wellness Program. Retrieved from: https://dhr.delaware.gov/benefits/notices/documents/notice-wellness-program.pdf Education Law Center (2018). ELC supports complaint of excessive discipline of students with
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 34
disabilities by North Star charter school. Retrieved from: http://www.edlawcenter.org/news/archives/nj-charter-schools/elc-supports-complaint-ofexcessive-discipline-of-students-with-disabilities-by-north-star-charter-school.html Education Law Center. (2016). J.L, on behalf of the minor child T.D. v Board of Trustees of the North Star Academy Charter School, Essex County. Retrieved from: http://www.edlawcenter.org/assets/files/pdfs/Newsblasts/OAL%20Order%20JL%20obo %20TD%20v%20North%20Star%20Academy.pdf. Harrison, K. (2016). Support and training for exceptional parents. Retrieved from: https://www.tnstep.org/pdf/ParentManual.pdf Michigan Protection and Advocacy Service. (2019). Special education: An Advocate’s Manual. Retrieved from https://mpas.org/resources/special-education-manual. Nguyen, V., Villarreal, M., Paredes, D., and Nious, K. (2013). Public Schools Delay or Deny Special education services for most vulnerable students. Retrieved from: https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Public-Schools-Delay-Deny-Special-EducationServices-231960511.html O’Conner, E.A, Yasik, A.E & Horner, S.L. (2016). Teachers’ knowledge of special education law: What do they know? Insights into Learning Disabilities 13(1), 7-18. Pacer Center. (2019). Parent Special Education Information. Who’s on My Child’s IEP Team. Retrieved from: https://www.pacer.org/parent/guide-to-iep/who-is-on-my-childs-iepteam.asp Proethica. (2018). Module 2: The Professional Educator. Retrieved from: https://ethics.assets.ets.org/prod/lesson/d582af62-c42e-42ef-906e362e9271a327/docs/proethica_elm__module_2_professional_educator_acc.pdf Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 35
Rebhorn, T. (2017). Developing your child’s IEP. Retrieved from: https://www.parentcenterhub.org/pa12/ United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. (nd). Doug C. v Hawaii. Retrieved from: https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/2013/9th.doug.c.v.hawaii.pdf. United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth District. (2003). Shirley Burges; Owen Hawzipta v. Independent School District NO. I-4,of Nobel County Oklahoma. Retrieved from: http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2003/05/02-6208.htm US Department of Education. (nd). A guide to the Individualized Education Plan. Retrieved from: https://www2.ed.gov/parents/needs/speced/iepguide/index.html#process U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Questions and Answers (Q&A) on U. S. Supreme Court Case Decision Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1. Retrieved from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/qa-endrewcase-12-07-2017.pdf. Wright, P., & Wright, P. (2013). Analysis of Doug C. v Hawaii. Retrieved from https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/art/dougc.hawaii.pwanalysis.htm
Micah Edwards | SEA | Parents’ Role, Rights, and Responsibilities in the IEP Process 36