Exceptional Teaching at Walhalla High School

I'll bet there are serveral students giving thanks for their inspiring, dedicated, and caring teacher in one Walhalla High classroom. Today, I had the privilege of observing a real-life activity being taught to a group of students who were engaged in their learning. The students were expected to create a Thanksgiving menu and develop a plan for purchasing the appropriate amount of ingredients taking into consideration the number of family members to be served. Technology was utilized as students went online to "shop" for bargains. They also used a sale paper from a local grocery store to find the best buys. I applaud this teacher for taking the time to think of a creative way to actively involve students in an authentic learning situation.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Dr. Yell's Four-Step Model for Developing Legally Correct and Educationally Meaningful IEP's

Dr. Mitch Yell's presentation in August 2008 provided a way for our special education teachers to think of the the IEP process as a four-step model with following questions:



Step 1: Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance

Question: What are the student's unique educational needs that must be considered in developing the individualized program?

Step 2: Measurable Annual Goals

Question: What goals will enable the student to achieve meaningful educational benefit?

Step 3: Special Education Services

Question: What services will we provide to the student to address each of his or her educational needs?

Step 4: Progress Monitoring

Question: How will we monitor the student's progress to determine if the instructional program is effective?



Every special education teacher needs to ask these four questions with respect to each IEP for which they are case manager.

Who Can Serve As LEA at IEP Meetings?

IDEIA 2004 section 300.321 clarifies the qualifications of an LEA...
(4) A representative of the public agency who--
(i) Is qualified to provide, or supervise the provision of, specially
designed instruction to meet the unique needs of children with
disabilities;
(ii) Is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum; and
(iii) Is knowledgeable about the availability of resources of the public
agency.
Principals are permitted to authorize a designee that meets LEA eligibility criteria when they are unable to attend an IEP meeting. Rather than considering the position a person holds when selecting a designee (e.g. guidance counselor, speech-language pathologist, special education teacher), it is best practice to consider whether the individual in question meets the specific criteria. Some guidance counselors have special education certification and meet the first criterion...others do not. A speech-language therapist meets the first criterion, but they may not have an understanding of the general education curriculum or availability of resources if they are in their Clincial Fellowship Year. The LEA at an IEP meeting holds a considerable amount of power to authorize services. Principals are advised to select their designee with care.

Can a Student With a Disability be Suspended from the Bus?

Yes...children with disabilities may be suspended from using public school transportation even though they are not suspended from school. However, bus suspension may affect the disrict's requirement to provide FAPE if special education services are needed for the child to receive FAPE and the child needs transportation to receive special education services, transportation would be needed and would have to be addressed by the IEP Team. The following guidance to school districts to determine if school days for bus suspension count as school days for change of placement and provision of services purposes may be useful:

• The school is ALWAYS required to proved FAPE. If a child with a disability cannot get to school to benefit from special education, it is likely that the school is requred to continue to provide transportation in some manner.
• If transportation is specified as a related service on the IEP, school days of suspension from bus transportation would count in determining if a change of placement occurs and in provision of services unless the school provides transportation in some other way.
• If transportation is NOT required as a related service under the IEP, school days of suspension from the bus should NOT count as school days of suspension for change of placement and provision of services purposes. In such cases, the child's parents have the same obligation to get the child to and from school as a child without disabilities who has been suspended from the bus (unless the parents cannot provide the needed transportation). Also, if bus transportation is not included on the IEP, the comments suggest a suspension from transportation privileges may indicate the IEP should consider whether that behavior on the bus should be addressed within the IEP or a behavior intervention plan for the child. (Federal Register, August 14, 2006, p. 46715).

This Q and A was taken from South Carolina's Parent Rights in Special Education (Procedural Safeguards) p. 137.

Does In-School Suspension Count as a Day of Suspension Toward the 11th Day Rule?

I just received a copy of "Parent Rights in Special Education (Procedural Safeguards)" from the Office of Exceptional Children at the SC State Department of Education. The word DRAFT is clearly written on each page in addition to the following statement, "It is a 'living' document and will change and grow as resources and information become available."
One thing I love about the format of our new state policies and procedures for special education, is the Q and A section at the end of each chapter...here is an example:
So, does in-school suspension count as a day of suspension toward the 11th day rule?

Whether school days of in-school suspension count as school days of suspension for determining if a change of placement has occurred depends on the nature of the in-school suspension environment. Many schools already use in-school suspension for code of conduct violations. Because children frequently are unsupervised and undirected by school personnel if placed on out-of-school suspension, many school districts prefer to use in-school suspension, at least for first-time offenders or less serious offenses. Comments following the Federal regulations indicate that school districts have authoirity to utilize in-school suspension as a disciplinary tool (Federal Register, August 6, 2006, p. 46715).

Additionally, a school day of in-school suspension should not count as a school day of suspension for services or change of placement purposes if, during the in-school suspension, the child is afforded an opportunity to:

• continue to appropriately progress in the general curriculum;
• continue to receive the services specified on his or her IEP; and
• continue to participate with children without disabilities to the extent they would have in their current placement.

The assumption is that school districts may use in-school suspension for children with disabilties just as they would for children without disabilities. The issue is really whether the school day(s) count toward accumulating the 11th school day of suspension which would require the beginning of educational services or toward the 10 consecutive school days for change of placement or provision of services. The Comments indicate that for children with disabilities, if the in-school suspension approximates the current placement in the areas outlined above, it does not count toward the 10 school days needed for a change of placement or provision of services. On he other hand, if in-school suspension is a place where children are held without opportunities to progress in the general curriculum, receive IEP services, and participate with children without disabilties to the same extent they would have in the current placement, the days do count as school days of suspension for change of placement and provision of services purposes.

Opening An IEP Meeting

The way you open an IEP meeting can impact the level of effective communication and collaboration you achieve. Greet members with a smile and handshake upon entry. Begin each meeting with introductions and a statement regarding the purpose of the IEP meeting (e.g., annual review, special review, reevaluation eligibility review).

An example of an opening statement..."Good Afternoon and welcome. We are meeting today to review Mickey's IEP and to talk about whether he is making progress toward his goals and if he has any needs that are not being met. It is our job to work together to determine any changes that need to be made to his IEP. Input from every member is important and must be considered before we can make changes. We all want what is best for Mickey."
Agendas are very helpful for keeping teams on track. If a parent brings up a discussion point that has no relevance to the meeting, take a note on the matter and assure them their concern is important. Offer to set up a time after the meeting to talk about it or state that you will pass the concern on the the appropropriate party (e.g., administration).
If you are expecting the meeting to be contentious, it may be a good idea to state some ground rules as part of the introduction. Examples of ground rules include:

• Only one person may speak at at time
• Statements should not be made personal or taken personnally
• Every person has the right to be heard
• Civility must be maintained

Conducting an effective IEP meeting will be easier when you set the stage for effective communication.

The Effects of Psychotropic Medications

At yesterday's local chapter of Council for Exceptional Children meeting, Dr. Joe Ryan of Clemson University shared the effects of psychotropic medications on our children. He stressed the imperativeness of having open communication between physician's prescribing medications and school personnel who actually see and can report on the effects. He highly recommended that teachers gather information before the medications are administered so physicians can look at the effects of the medications compared to a baseline. Dr. Ryan shared three valuable websites whereby people can type in the names of medications and learn what they are prescribed for, how they work, potential side effects, and cautions:

http://allpsych.com/meds.html

http://www.webmd.com/drugs/index-drugs.aspx

http://jchealth.jobcorps.gov/health-topics/mhd/pm

Thank you Dr. Ryan for this valuable information that will help us better understand the needs of our students with disabilities!

Step To Their Side

In William Ury's book Getting Past No, he explains we need to overcome the other side's negative emotion by stepping to their side. Disarming the other person's hostile emotion is accomplished through a surprise maneuver...doing the opposite of what they expect. "If they are stonewalling, they expect you to aply pressure; if they are attacking, they expect you to resist." Stepping to their side removes the adversarial nature of the situation and to do this you must...

• listen--A character in a novel by Andre Gide stated, "Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens, we have to keep going back and beginning all over again." Paraphrase and ask for corrections.



• acknowledge--using phrases such as "You have a point there" or "I know exactly what you mean" or "I understand what you're saying" doesn't mean you are agreeing with them. If appropriate, offer an apology. Be careful! Your tone and body language must line up with your acknowledgement.



• agree--Look for points to agree on and state your views without provoking. Rather than saying "Yes, but..." say Yes, and..."

Stepping to the other side does not mean giving in. It demonstrates your earnest desire to create a climate for joint problem solving.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and click on the strand for "Joint-problem solving" to see other helpful tips related to this topic. Hope it helps!

Go to the Balcony

In yesterday's blog, I reviewed five barriers to cooperation as offered by William Ury of the Harvard Law School's Program on Negotiation. At IEP meetings, we can sometimes find ourselves having to breakthrough barriers that keep us from joint problem solving. The first barrier is our human reaction to conflict and that is typically the desire to strike back, give in, or just end the relationship. The third option is not one we can consider in special education as we are obligated to serve students with disabililities until the age 21. I love this quote by Ambrose Bierce...

"Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret"

Ury's tactic for breaking down this barrier is to Go To The Balcony. "When you find yourself facing a difficult negotiation, you need to step back, collect your wits, and see the situtation objectively." This will allow you to separate yourself from the natural tendencies to retaliate, throw in the towel, or call it quits.

Another advantage is that it provides the opportunity to buy time and think. I have been involved in several meetings when the team just needed to take a break for 10 minutes to let each party "go to the balcony". In some cases upon return, this results in a new perspective to joint problem solving and ultimately resolution.

Finally, Rome wasn't built in a day. Sometimes the meeting needs to be rescheduled to afford a lengthier trip "to the balcony" and time to think about the problem at hand. If you find yourself in a tough situation in an IEP meeting or predict such can happen, call Special Services and ask for help from someone in our office. It's what we do and we will be there for you.

Managing Difficult IEP Meetings

One of the most difficult aspects of being a special education teacher is having to sometimes lead confrontational IEP meetings. Rather than viewing these meetings as a negotiation attempt, I try to frame the process as joint problem-solving. One of the most helpful books I have read is called Getting Past No by William Ury. He describes this joint problem-solving as "soft on the people, hard on the problem." Going into those types of meetings with an agenda (it helps keep the team on track) and thorough preparation is essential, but having an understanding of what may hinder a successful outcome may also prove beneficial. According to Ury, there are five barriers to cooperation:

1. Your reaction. As humans, we naturally feel like striking back in confrontational situations. Or, sometimes we feel like it may just be easier to give in and preserve the relationship. This just "perpetuates the action-reaction cycle that leaves both sides losers."


2. Their emotion. The other side's ability to listen may be blocked by fear, distrust, anger, hostility, etc.


3. Their position. The other side may believe there is no other way to negotiate than to get you to give in. Joint problem-solving requires that both sides listen for understanding and work toward a solution.


4. Their dissatisfaction. The other side may turn down your idea just because it is yours. "Even if you can satisfy their interests, they may fear losing face if they have to back down."


5. Their power. The other side may view the only outcome as win-lose. "If they can get what they want by power plays, why should they cooperate with you?"

Joint problem-solving requires identifying and breaking down barriers to cooperation.

Here is the hook....keep reading my posts for more on this subject.

S.B. v. Pomona Unified School District, 50 IDELR 72, 2008 WL 1766953 (C.D. Cal. 2008)

I am always interested in reading case law as it provides an indication of how courts are ruling with regard to special education issues. It seems like I can always think of an instance where the variables of the case are similar to a situation I have knowdedge about . In S.B. V. Pomona Unified School District, the courts determined that a district's failure to include the student's private preschool teacher was a procedural violation as the student was denied educational opportunity. The courts recognized the private preschool teacher as the regular education teacher who should should have been in attendance to provide information regarding the student's present levels of educational performance and unique needs. "At the very least, she could have elaborated on what she had told the transdisciplinary assessent team." Furthermore, her attendance "would have assisted the IEP team in devising a program that was better tailored to Student's abilities and special needs." This case exemplifies the importance of having a regular education teacher at IEP meetings. Not having a regular education teacher of the student at an IEP meeting is a procedural violation of the IDEA and can result in the denial of a free and appropriate public education. If you are having trouble getting regular education teacher attendance at IEP meetings, please consult your school administrator and ask for assistance. IDEA compliance is certainly rationale for this practice; however, what is even more important is that it is what is in the best interest of our students and they are worth it.

IEP Minutes Comment Response

I am so relieved to know I have at least one reader. :) Thank you for taking the time to post the comment below. I understand exactly the message you are conveying. I have been there and done that on several occasions and you are right. It is very difficult to take quality notes when you are conducting the meeting. The minutes can and most likely should be taken by another district IEP team member so the case manager can effectively lead the meeting. Minute taking can even be a group effort if needed. Recently, an assistant principal and I passed the notes back and forth between us as we participated in a special review conducted by the case manager. I know several guidance counselors who are more than willing to take excellent notes when asked. They have sat in on enough meetings to understand the importance and rationale of the task. I will send out a Word document of the tips I posted yesterday so you can offer them to your notetaker at the next meeting. Again, thanks for the comment!

The MAJOR problem I find with minutes of an IEP meeting is taking them. Teachers are there to participate and in many cases are unable to stay through the entire meeting because they too have a class to attend to. Adm. may enter a meeting intending to stay but get called away during a meeting for discipline or duty and return later. The only person who knows what needs to go in the minutes is the caseholder and it is EXTREMELY to manage and direct a meeting while attempting to take minutes at the same time. This prolongs the meeting to an unrealistic time length. How can this be accomplished with less inconvenience for all participants? I already do as you suggest by completing most of the information prior to the beginning of the meeting. Is it possible for guidance counselors to attend a brief orientation on what needs to be in minutes and perhaps we could utilize them more during the meeting? Just a thought. I get really stressed knowing that the minutes are a vital part of the IEP. Thanks.

Section 504 Myths continued

Yesterday, I stated (or typed) that there were six remaining myths and realities. My apologies. There are only four.

Julie Weatherly, owner of Resolutions in Special Education, Inc., was featured in a journal titled In CASE (Counsel for Administrators in Special Education) as she concluded a second article in a two part series regarding the myths and realities of 504 plans. The second part of the series covers four additional myths related to Section 504. Below is a summary...

Myth #5: A student diagnosed by a physician as having ADHD is "automatically covered" by Section 504 because the student is now regarded as having a disability.

Reality: A medical diagnosis alone does not mean a child is disabled under Section 504. A 504 team must have evidence to support the existence of a disability and should seek additional information if the determination is in question. According to Ms. Weatherly, "The 'record of' and 'regarded as' portions of the definition are not relevant to Student Support Teams (SST)/Child Study Teams (CST) determinations about instructional supports an accommodations that a student may need."

Myth #6: A Section 504 plan applies to students diagnosed with ADHD who are making B's and C's but have the capability of doing better "but for" the ADHD.

Reality: The above description is not sufficient for Section 504 eligibility. "A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a student's ability to learn in comparison to the average student population is a disability under Section 504."

Myth #7: The school district is obligated to evaluate every student displaying characteristics of ADD/ADHD to determine if they are 504 eligible.

Reality: According to Weatherly, "Whether the school district is required to fund/conduct a medical evaluation depends upon whether the school district suspects that a disability exists and the reason the information is needed by the school district." If a disability is suspected and the team needs more information to make the determination, the school district is responsible for conducting an evaluation. If a medical assessment is necessary and the parents don't voluntarily provide the medical information, the school district must provide it at no cost to the parents.

Myth #8: An exhaustive formal evaluation is necessary to determine eligibility for Section 504.

Reality: Formal assessment is not always necessary to determine the existence of a disability. Weatherly clarifies, "Only an 'evaluation' sufficient to provide information to determine the existence of a disability under Section 504 need be obtained." The term "evaluation" could be used to describe the process of reviewing existing data including behavioral observations.

I applaud the Section 504 teams in the School District of Oconee County for diligently evaluating each case to determine eligibility. They are doing a great job!

Section 504 Common Myths

In the winter edition of In CASE (Counsel for Administrators in Special Education), Julie Weatherly presents four common myths with regard to section 504. http://web.wmisd.org/General%20Educations/504/504%20Documents/504%20Myths.pdf.

The common myths are as follows:

Myth #1: The Student Support Team process is the "way" to special education.

Myth #2: Section 504 provides more than IDEA in terms of coverage and protection in the general education environment.

Myth #3: Every student who has ever been in special education is automatically covered by Section 504 because the student has a "record of" a disability.

Myth #4: When a student is referred for a special education evaluation and is deemed ineligible for special education services, the student is automatically covered by Section 504.

Please follow the link above for the REALITY associated with each of these four myths.

Please tune in tomorrow for the next six 504 myths and their associated realities.

If you are interested in reading the original version of section 504 law, follow this link to The Rehabilitation Act of 1973> http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/reg/narrative.html