August 9-12, 2011: Williamsburg, VA - The William & Mary Law Institute of Special Education Advocacy is a four-day training program in special education advocacy hosted by the William & Mary School of Law, and co-sponsored by the PELE Special Education Advocacy Clinic, Wrightslaw, and The Oklahoma Disability Law Center. Attendance is limited to 20. Attendees will be selected by an application process. Click here for the application. Cost: $495. Pat is delighted to be a member of the faculty for this training.
Pat will be training on Friday on the topics of Preparing Parents for Meetings and Client Management.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Robert Crabtree: Do's and Don'ts for Teacher-Advocates (Part Two)
Massachusetts attorney, Bob Crabtree has written another great article for the newsletter of Massachusetts' Parent Information and Training Program, the Federation for Children with Special Needs. In the FCSN's newsletter, Newsline, Bob continued his great article on how Teacher-Advocates can act in the best interest of their students yet protect their important positions. You can access this article at: http://www.fcsn.org. You can subscribe to the e-version of this excellent newsletter by clicking here.
Here is a summary of Bob's hints in his latest article:
1. Always maintain a professional demeanor.
2. Know your student.
3. DOCUMENT!
4. Teach by the book!
5. Communicate directly and honestly.
6. Team up with similarly minded professionals.
7. When working with administrators assume a common goal.
8. Be understanding about anxious parents.
Be sure to read the entire article. Bob gives much more information than this short summary I have provided.
Here is a summary of Bob's hints in his latest article:
1. Always maintain a professional demeanor.
2. Know your student.
3. DOCUMENT!
4. Teach by the book!
5. Communicate directly and honestly.
6. Team up with similarly minded professionals.
7. When working with administrators assume a common goal.
8. Be understanding about anxious parents.
Be sure to read the entire article. Bob gives much more information than this short summary I have provided.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Why Special Education "Labels" Should Mean Little to Parents
Another parent has emailed me with a common concern. She wants the school to assign her child a different "label" (i.e., eligibility category). May parents and school folks are confused about the reason that schools use "labels". It is a common misconception that the "label" drives the services and/or the placement (i.e., the program into which the school places the child).
IDEA specifically says that a child does not have to have any type of "label" in order to receive services.
We answer this question over and over in our Wrightslaw Seminars.
Further, I cannot say it any better than Pete and Pam Wright say it in their blog:
"The law is clear that if a child has a disability, and the disability adversely affects educational performance, then the child is entitled to services under IDEA 2004 and entitled to an IEP.
The law also says that child does not even need to have a label to be eligible for those services." Wrightslaw Blog, 8-19-2010.
A school is required to use labels in order to report to the state and federal government and for it to receive its funding for students eligible under state and federal special education standards. That's all.
The Commentary also addresses this in several places: " ... each child's educational placement must be determined on a individual case-by-case basis depending on each child's unique educational needs and circumstances, rather than by the child's category of disability, and must be based on the child's IEP. FR 46586,
In all cases, placement decisions must be individually determined on the basis of each child's abilities and needs and each child's IEP, and not solely on factors such as category of disability, severity of disability, availability of special education and related services, configuration of the service delivery system, availability of space, or administrative convenience. FR 46588
Services must meet the child's needs and cannot be determined by the child's eligibility category. FR 46655
The Act does not require children to be identified with a particular disability category for purposes of the delivery of special education and related services. In other words, while the Act requires the the Department collect aggregate data on children's disabilities, it does not require that particular children be labeled with particular disabilities for purposes of service deliver, since a child's entitlement under the Act is to FAPE and not to a particular disability label. FR 46737
The U.S. Department of Education and IDEA make it clear. Schools must not use labels to limit a child to specific services, programs or placements. If your school tells you different, it is confused about the requirements.
You may access the Commentary here: http://www.wrightslaw.com/idea/comment/all.46540-46845.pdf
IDEA specifically says that a child does not have to have any type of "label" in order to receive services.
We answer this question over and over in our Wrightslaw Seminars.
Further, I cannot say it any better than Pete and Pam Wright say it in their blog:
"The law is clear that if a child has a disability, and the disability adversely affects educational performance, then the child is entitled to services under IDEA 2004 and entitled to an IEP.
The law also says that child does not even need to have a label to be eligible for those services." Wrightslaw Blog, 8-19-2010.
A school is required to use labels in order to report to the state and federal government and for it to receive its funding for students eligible under state and federal special education standards. That's all.
The Commentary also addresses this in several places: " ... each child's educational placement must be determined on a individual case-by-case basis depending on each child's unique educational needs and circumstances, rather than by the child's category of disability, and must be based on the child's IEP. FR 46586,
In all cases, placement decisions must be individually determined on the basis of each child's abilities and needs and each child's IEP, and not solely on factors such as category of disability, severity of disability, availability of special education and related services, configuration of the service delivery system, availability of space, or administrative convenience. FR 46588
Services must meet the child's needs and cannot be determined by the child's eligibility category. FR 46655
The Act does not require children to be identified with a particular disability category for purposes of the delivery of special education and related services. In other words, while the Act requires the the Department collect aggregate data on children's disabilities, it does not require that particular children be labeled with particular disabilities for purposes of service deliver, since a child's entitlement under the Act is to FAPE and not to a particular disability label. FR 46737
The U.S. Department of Education and IDEA make it clear. Schools must not use labels to limit a child to specific services, programs or placements. If your school tells you different, it is confused about the requirements.
You may access the Commentary here: http://www.wrightslaw.com/idea/comment/all.46540-46845.pdf
Monday, May 9, 2011
The Delphi and Alinkski Techniques
Have you attended an IEP meeting lately where it seemed like there was a hidden agenda and you weren't told what it was? You must read up on the Delphi and Alinski Techniques and learn how to diffuse them. This technique is being used frequently to achieve consensus at IEP meetings and at community meetings that are used to set school board policy. If you do not understand how these are used to achieve "consensus" - i.e. make everyone agree on a hidden agenda - you may not fully understand why IEP meetings do not go the way you intend them to go.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Wrightslaw Seminar in Cincinnati on Saturday
I will be attending the Wrightslaw Seminar this Saturday. If you are there, please be sure to look me up and say, "Hello." If you have not planned to attend, I believe there are still openings.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Guest Column in Lafayette Journal & Courier
My guest column, titled, "The Blame Game" was printed in this morning's Lafayette (IN) Journal and Courier. The full, text is below, complete with research links which were largly omitted from the column.
Why do children continue to fail in school despite being repeatedly tested? According to schools, children fail because they do not want to learn or their parents do not care. Typical school culture is to first, blame the child, and then blame the parent.
Dr. Galen Alessi, Psychology Professor at Western Michigan University researched this phenomenon by asking 5,000 school psychologists why children have learning and behavior problems. Not one psychologist mentioned inappropriate curriculum, ineffective teaching, or ineffective school management practices as a factor for student failure. Psychologists blamed parent and home factors 10-20 percent of the time and child factors 100 percent of the time.
Common sense tells us that it cannot always be the fault of the parent and the student.
Most five-year-olds are excited about starting school. We need to find out why that excitement wanes and dies.
Schools always treat parents as outsiders in educational decision-making. It’s okay for parents make copies, file records, and raise funds, but a parent who offers methodology suggestions is labeled a “helicopter” parent at best, a “nutcase” at worst and told to leave this to the experts.
We never hear about parents who spend hours helping their child or who pay expensive tutors, only to see their child fail. Nor do we hear about parents who go to school unsuccessfully begging for help for their child.
Some parents never learn they have a right to have the school test their child for conditions that interfere with learning. Children placed in special education programs may spend their entire school career there without learning to read. They were either identified too late, after the window of opportunity had closed, or, they received “accommodations,” not appropriate reading instruction. Instead of learning to read, their assignments and tests were read to them. They are unprepared for further education, employment, and independent living.
According to the Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR), schools can identify children with reading disorders in preschool or kindergarten. Serious reading difficulties are preventable with the right kind of intensive instruction provided early in a child’s development. That window of opportunity closes early. After first grade, a student can still improve. However, those who do not receive early powerful interventions will always perform poorly on phonemic decoding, reading fluency, and spelling. They will never be able to close the gap.
Alessi, Galen. (1988) Diagnosis Diagnosed: A Systemic Reaction. Professional School Psychology, 3: 145-151
http://www.fcrr.org/TechnicalReports/Dyslexia_Technical_Assistance_Paper-Final.pdf
Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C.A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T. , & Garvin, C. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psycholog, 91, 579-593.
http://mustang.doe.state.in.us/IS/iststate2.cfm?year=2009.20&grade=3&gender=C&SubmitForm=Submit
Why do children continue to fail in school despite being repeatedly tested? According to schools, children fail because they do not want to learn or their parents do not care. Typical school culture is to first, blame the child, and then blame the parent.
Dr. Galen Alessi, Psychology Professor at Western Michigan University researched this phenomenon by asking 5,000 school psychologists why children have learning and behavior problems. Not one psychologist mentioned inappropriate curriculum, ineffective teaching, or ineffective school management practices as a factor for student failure. Psychologists blamed parent and home factors 10-20 percent of the time and child factors 100 percent of the time.
Common sense tells us that it cannot always be the fault of the parent and the student.
Most five-year-olds are excited about starting school. We need to find out why that excitement wanes and dies.
Schools always treat parents as outsiders in educational decision-making. It’s okay for parents make copies, file records, and raise funds, but a parent who offers methodology suggestions is labeled a “helicopter” parent at best, a “nutcase” at worst and told to leave this to the experts.
We never hear about parents who spend hours helping their child or who pay expensive tutors, only to see their child fail. Nor do we hear about parents who go to school unsuccessfully begging for help for their child.
Some parents never learn they have a right to have the school test their child for conditions that interfere with learning. Children placed in special education programs may spend their entire school career there without learning to read. They were either identified too late, after the window of opportunity had closed, or, they received “accommodations,” not appropriate reading instruction. Instead of learning to read, their assignments and tests were read to them. They are unprepared for further education, employment, and independent living.
According to the Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR), schools can identify children with reading disorders in preschool or kindergarten. Serious reading difficulties are preventable with the right kind of intensive instruction provided early in a child’s development. That window of opportunity closes early. After first grade, a student can still improve. However, those who do not receive early powerful interventions will always perform poorly on phonemic decoding, reading fluency, and spelling. They will never be able to close the gap.
Alessi, Galen. (1988) Diagnosis Diagnosed: A Systemic Reaction. Professional School Psychology, 3: 145-151
http://www.fcrr.org/TechnicalReports/Dyslexia_Technical_Assistance_Paper-Final.pdf
Torgesen, J.K., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C.A., Rose, E., Lindamood, P., Conway, T. , & Garvin, C. (1999). Preventing reading failure in young children with phonological processing disabilities: Group and individual responses to instruction. Journal of Educational Psycholog, 91, 579-593.
http://mustang.doe.state.in.us/IS/iststate2.cfm?year=2009.20&grade=3&gender=C&SubmitForm=Submit
Saturday, April 9, 2011
A Great Advocate Is Gone
It is with sadness I must report that the special education community has lost a great advocate. Dee Alpert, New York, New York, passed away suddenly yesterday. I will miss her to-the-point posts on the COPAA (Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, http://www.copaa.net) List Serve. The entire special education community will miss her wonderful advocacy efforts. Dee was publisher of the Special Education Muckraker.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
