Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Chp[1]. 3 Special Education

968 views

Published on

Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Public School Law, American With Disabilities Action, Due Process, Discrimination, Bill of Rights, Least Restrictive Environment

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Chp[1]. 3 Special Education

  1. 1. T H R E E Special Education William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
  2. 2. jargon of special education <ul><li>p.l. 94-I42 : passed in 1975 guaranteeing every child with a disability free and appropriate education now know as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) </li></ul><ul><li>504: prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities in programs that receive federal funds </li></ul><ul><li>FAPE: Free, appropriate public education </li></ul><ul><li>IEP: Individualized education program </li></ul><ul><li>ARD: Admission, review, and dismissal. </li></ul><ul><li>Placement: This refers to the instructional arrangement in which the child is educated. </li></ul><ul><li>LRE: Least restrictive environment </li></ul>
  3. 3. jargon of special education <ul><li>Related Services: Special transportation and other non-instructional services that are necessary for the child to obtain benefit from the educational program. </li></ul><ul><li>Eligibility: Meeting certain criteria for federally funded special education programs . </li></ul><ul><li>FIE: Full Individual Evaluation. </li></ul><ul><li>IEE: Independent Educational Evaluation. </li></ul><ul><li>ESY: Extended School Year </li></ul><ul><li>OSEP: Office of Special Education Programs. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Federal legislation Child Find <ul><li>School districts take an active role in identifying and serving students with a need. </li></ul><ul><li>Publicize the availability of special education services. </li></ul><ul><li>Train teachers to identify the typical signs of disability </li></ul><ul><li>Reach out to private-school administrators and home schoolers. </li></ul>
  5. 5. Federal Legislation Evaluation <ul><li>To avoid untutored labeling a Full Individual Evaluation (FIE) </li></ul><ul><li>ARD committee meets in order to eliminate unnecessary testing. </li></ul><ul><li>Parents have the right to disagree with decisions if so they are entitled to obtain an Independent Educational Evaluation but can force the district to accept data. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Federal Legislation Eligibility <ul><li>Two Requirements </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Student must have a disability that qualifies under the law </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The student must as a result of the disability need special education services </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Federal Legislation ARD Committee <ul><li>ARD Committee is composed of: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The parent (s) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A regular education teacher </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A special education teacher </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Someone who can interpret the instructional implications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A representative of the school district </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Others in the judgment of the parents or the school, have special knowledge or expertise </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>When appropriate, the student </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Federal Legislation Individualized Education Program <ul><li>A statement of the child’s present levels of education </li></ul><ul><li>Measurable annual goals, including short-term objectives </li></ul><ul><li>Related services, supplemental aids and services, program modifications and supporters for school personnel that provides services to the child </li></ul><ul><li>Explanation for class exclusion </li></ul><ul><li>Modifications needed </li></ul><ul><li>Dates services are provided </li></ul><ul><li>Statement of how the parents will be informed of child’s progress </li></ul>
  9. 9. Federal Legislation General Curriculum <ul><li>Refers to the things the regular education students are expected to learn </li></ul><ul><li>Special education students should be taught as much as possible, the same subject matter that the regular education students are taught. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Federal Legislation NCLB and Statewide Assessments <ul><li>Require states to hold all students to the same academic standards, and to demonstrate “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) through statewide test in certain subjects. </li></ul>
  11. 11. Federal Legislation Least Restrictive Environment <ul><li>The law mandates that LRE, but it also mandates a full continuum of alternative placements, some of them highly restrictive. </li></ul><ul><li>Other terms Mainstreaming, and Inclusion </li></ul>
  12. 12. Federal Legislation Procedural Safeguards <ul><li>Four Aspects </li></ul><ul><li>Notice </li></ul><ul><li>Consent </li></ul><ul><li>The right to an IEE </li></ul><ul><li>The right to a Due Process Meeting </li></ul>
  13. 13. Federal Legislation Attorneys’ Fees <ul><li>Parents who “prevail” in a special education dispute with a school district are entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees. </li></ul><ul><li>Congress put some limits on recovery of attorney fees in IDEA 1997 and 2004. </li></ul>
  14. 14. Federal Legislation FAPE <ul><li>Board of Education v. Rowley </li></ul><ul><li>established two things </li></ul><ul><li>School districts are not required to maximize the potential of a child but rather provide some educational benefit to the child. </li></ul><ul><li>How courts in the future would examine disputes under IDEA </li></ul>
  15. 15. Federal Legislation Related Services <ul><li>If a student needs the services to attend school, and the service can be provided by someone other than an M.D., then the school district must provide or pay for the service. </li></ul>
  16. 16. Federal Legislation Extended School Year Services
  17. 17. Federal Legislation Unilateral Placements <ul><li>This involves a disagreement between school and parent as to the appropriate placement </li></ul><ul><li>. </li></ul>PARENTS vs. SCHOOL - Reimbursement <ul><li>Cost Reimbursements </li></ul><ul><li>What the school believes </li></ul><ul><li>What the parent believes </li></ul><ul><li>Burden of Proof - Parent </li></ul><ul><li>Prove IEP and/or Placement recommended by school is inappropriate </li></ul><ul><li>Parents prove their arranged IEP and Placement are appropriate </li></ul><ul><li>Factors faced by - Parent </li></ul><ul><li>Law presumes program recommended by school is appropriate </li></ul><ul><li>Law require school to propose a program that confer (reasonable </li></ul><ul><li>benefit) </li></ul><ul><li>School proposed program will be less restrictive than the private placement </li></ul><ul><li>Teague I.S.D. v. Todd L. (1993) Denied </li></ul><ul><li>Reimbursement Denied </li></ul><ul><li>School program appropriate </li></ul><ul><li>Restrictive vs. Non-Restrictive </li></ul><ul><li>Florence County School District Four v. Carter(1994) </li></ul><ul><li>Facility </li></ul><ul><li>Argument </li></ul><ul><li>U S Supreme Court Reimbursement </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA 1997 Procedural Requirements </li></ul><ul><li>School – Line of Defense (fix problem) </li></ul><ul><li>Parent - Procedural Requirement Notice </li></ul><ul><li>Private Schooling – Assemble, evaluate, devise, and determine FAPE </li></ul>
  18. 18. Federal Legislation Private-School Children IDEA 1997 <ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Under child find the public school is required to evaluate students in private school for special education. </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>They are also required to spend a proportionate share of federal special education funds </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Public to Private </li></ul><ul><li>Child Find </li></ul><ul><li>Proportionate Share </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA 1997 </li></ul><ul><li>FAPE </li></ul><ul><li>Services </li></ul><ul><li>No Due process </li></ul><ul><li>Decisions by ISD </li></ul><ul><li>Loss of rights </li></ul><ul><li>Texas </li></ul><ul><li>Exception </li></ul><ul><li>Dual Enrollment </li></ul>
  19. 19. Discipline of Students with Disabilities <ul><li>The ARD committee must review all relevant information and then answer two questions: </li></ul><ul><li>Was the conduct of the student caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial relationship to the child’s disability? </li></ul><ul><li>Was the conduct of the student a direct result of the school’s failure to implement the IEP? </li></ul><ul><li>Congress and Special Education </li></ul><ul><li>Guarantee an appropriate education </li></ul><ul><li>Encourage safe classrooms free drugs </li></ul><ul><li>S-1 v. Turlington </li></ul><ul><li>U.S. Court of Appeals / Fifth Circuit </li></ul><ul><li>Student Behavior </li></ul><ul><li>Students Classification </li></ul><ul><li>Disability or Not </li></ul><ul><li>Supreme Court – Honig v. Doe </li></ul><ul><li>Dangerous Behavior </li></ul><ul><li>Suspension Lengths </li></ul><ul><li>Injunction </li></ul><ul><li>“ Stay Put” provision of IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Then Current Placement </li></ul><ul><li>Congress revision of Special Education discipline laws in IDEA 1997 </li></ul><ul><li>Congress enacted into federal law a requirement </li></ul><ul><li>Expellable Act </li></ul><ul><li>Congress nullifies major court decision </li></ul><ul><li>Common Wealth of Virginia v. Riley </li></ul><ul><li>Congress Intervention revised IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Nondisabled vs. Disabled </li></ul><ul><li>Stay Put </li></ul>
  20. 20. DISCIPLINE OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES <ul><li>V. Continued… </li></ul><ul><li>Exception to “stay put” </li></ul><ul><li>Violation to Code of Conduct </li></ul><ul><li>Removal longer Than 10 days </li></ul><ul><li>Congress adopted statutory language </li></ul><ul><li>Cumulative rule </li></ul><ul><li>Concept of a “Manifestation Determination” </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA 1997 </li></ul><ul><li>ARD Committee </li></ul><ul><li>Texas Legislature – TEC §37.0021 </li></ul><ul><li>Restraint and Time Out </li></ul><ul><li>Time Out </li></ul>
  21. 21. Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 <ul><li>Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973 </li></ul><ul><li>Federal Money </li></ul><ul><li>Americans with Disabilities Act </li></ul><ul><li>Section 504 three pronged definition </li></ul><ul><li>Group 1 </li></ul><ul><li>Group 2 </li></ul><ul><li>Group 3 </li></ul><ul><li>504 Special Treatment </li></ul><ul><li>Physical or Mental Impairment </li></ul><ul><li>ADD </li></ul><ul><li>LEP </li></ul><ul><li>Coverage of 504 </li></ul><ul><li>Mitigating Measures - Performance </li></ul><ul><li>Medication </li></ul><ul><li>Non Medication </li></ul><ul><li>504 Eligible </li></ul><ul><li>Performance </li></ul><ul><li>Potential </li></ul><ul><li>Genuine physical or mental impairment </li></ul><ul><li>Major life Activity </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA vs. 504 </li></ul><ul><li>Standards for eligibility </li></ul><ul><li>Requirements </li></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>William Allan Kritsonis, PhD </li></ul>

×