Responding to Allegations of Disability Harassment in Schools--Advice for Administrators

I highly recommend that administrators investigate all incidents of reported harassment.  This practice protected a school district from having to make a private school placement at parental request (Waco Independent School District, 59 IDELR 57, SEA TX 2012) when the parent of a student with Asperger syndrome alleged that bullying was the cause of her child's school anxiety.  School officials investigated and found no evidence of threats to the child's safety.  They also provided documentation that the alleged bullying didn't prevent access to learning and that the student had normal intelligence and could participate in the general curriculum with appropriate support.  The independent hearing officer over this case commented that it seemed as though the student was experiencing the normal stages of growing up and that his Asperger syndrome may have contributed to his negative thoughts regarding peer communications.  When allegations of bullying and/or harassment are made, the subsequent investigation could include interviews with multiple witnesses (if applicable) to help verify that statements are accurate.  In some cases, the responses may reveal that comments were mean or rude versus meeting the definition of bullying or harassment.  Reviewing student records (e.g., IEPs, developmental history, functional behavior assessments/behavior intervention plans, and discipline records) may also help clarify if a student's disability may be impacting his or her self perceptions and the interpretation of the meaning of other students' comments during social interaction.  IEP teams may determine it is in a child's best interest to make changes to his or her IEP even if bullying or harassment is not taking place.  In the Waco case, the team may have considered adding a goal to improve social skills and interpreting communication cues.   

Transition Services and Individual Graduation Plans

My daughter sent me this photo of her friend's courtyard in Cairo. When I visited a couple summers ago someone told me that taxes are not paid on homes and buildings under construction. I guess that explains all the rebar I saw when touring.

It is very important that special education teachers and guidance counselors work together when documenting transition services in Individual Education Plans (IEPs) and when developing Individual Graduation Plans (IGPs).
Under S.C. Code Ann. Section 59-59-140 (2004), an IGP must be developed detailing the courses necessary for the student to prepare for graduation and to successfuly transition into the workforce or postsecondary education. An IGP must do the following:

1. align career goals and a student's course of study;



2. be based on the student's selected cluster of study and an academic focus within that cluster;



3. include core academic subjects, which must include, but are not limited to, English, math, science, and social studies to ensure that requirements for graduation will be met;



4. include experience-based, career-oriented learning experiences including, but not limited to, internships, apprenticeships, mentoring, co-op education, and service learning;



5. be flexible to allow change in the course of study but be sufficiently structured to meet graduation requirements and admission to postsecondary education;



6. incorporate provisions of a student's individual education plan, when appropropriate; and,



7. be approved by a certified school guidance counselor and the student's parents, guardians, or individuals appointed by the parents or guardians to serve as their designee.
   

The IGP should help guide the development of the IEP and decisions regarding the course of study should relate directly to present levels of performance and the student's post-secondary goal.

IEP teams should ask these questions:

"Do the transition courses of study focus on improving the academic and functional achievement of the student to facilitate movement from high school to post-secondary school?"

"Do the student's courses and other educational experiences align with the post-secondary goals and the IGP?"

Under What Circumstances Must An IEP Team use FBAs and BIPs?

My daughter took this picture of a friend's gazebo in Cairo.

Pursuant to 34 CFR section 300.530(f), FBAs and BIPs are required when the LEA, the parent, and the relevant members of the child's IEP team determine that a student's conduct was a manifestation of his or her disability under 34 CFR section 300.530(e). If a child's misconduct has been found to have a direct and substantial relationship to his or her disability, the IEP team will need to conduct a FBA of the child, unless one has already been conducted. Similarly, the IEP team must write a BIP for this child, unless one already exists. If a BIP already exists, then the IEP team will need to review the plan and modify it, as necessary, to address the behavior.

For a child with a disability whose behavior impedes his or her learning or the learning of others, and for whom the IEP team has decided that a BIP is appropriate, or for a child with a disability whose violation of the code of student conduct is a manifestation of the child's disability, the IEP team must include a BIP in the child's IEP to address the behavioral needs of the child.

Yes...my daughter is still in Cairo. She took this picture of a father and son riding on a burro. I believe she still prefers a cab.

In Johnston County (NC) Schools , 56 IDELR 305 (OCRXI, D.C. (NC) 2011), the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) determined that a school district violated Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 when it conducted a manifestation determination review (MDR) after a student with ED and ADHD completed his suspensions. OCR explained that under Section 504 a reevaluation, including a MDR in the case of a disciplinary exclusion, must occur prior to a signficant change of placement. On February 5, 2010, the school district imposed a 10-day suspension to take effect the same day. However, the district had suspended the student two times earlier in the year. When MDR concluded that the student's conduct was a manifestion of the student's disability the parent claimed the school district violated Section 504 by imposing suspension prior to the MDR. In the case of a series of short-term suspensions, the MD review must occur prior to the last in a series of suspensions that cumulatively amount to more than 10 days.

Yes...it has been a long time since my last post. I've been working feverishly on my research to finish my dissertation. What a sweet day it will be when it is said and done! My daughter came home from Cairo for two weeks during the protests then returned as soon as Mubarak stepped down and classes at the American University in Cairo resumed. Here is another pic from the cab on our way to tour the pyramids last August.

Perry A. Zirkel, University Professor of education and law at Lehigh University, requested that I share the following opportunity with my readers:

Special Education Law Symposium 2011
June 26 - July 1, 2011
Lehigh University is offering its successful and intensive one-week Special Education Law Symposium under the co-direction of Drs. Perry Zirkel and James Newcomer. Presenters at the Institute will provide a practical analysis of legislation, regulations, and case law relating to the education of students with disabilities. Featuring a faculty of legal experts from several states, the program offers two parallel tracks—one for basic and the other for advanced practitioners. The workshop is offered alternatively for graduate or continuing education credit.
The keynote speaker will be Dr. Melody Musgrove, Director of the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
To view the program details or register, visit our website: http://www.lehigh.edu/education/law
and follow us on Facebook: Special Education Law Symposium - Lehigh University.

For questions contact Sharon Fehlinger at srf5@lehigh.edu or 610-597-4643. Please disseminate this information to any interested colleagues.

Parental Consent for the Initial Provision of Special Education and Related Services

This is a picture of my daughter standing on the balcony of our hotel (Dusit Thani) in New Cairo. There was an "oasis" outside our window but beyond that is it mostly sand and new construction homes.

The Special Education Process Guide for South Carolina revised 10/1/10 clarifies that when a parent provides consent for the initial provision of special education and related services it does not mean the parents are consenting to each service included in the initial IEP developed for their child. This consent requirement only applies to the initial provision of special education and related services generally, and not to the particular special education and related services to be included in the child's initial IEP. In order to give informed consent to the initial provision of special education and related services under 34 CFR Section 300.300(b)(1), parents must be fully informed of what special education and related services are and the types of services their child might need, but not the exact program of services that would be included in an IEP to be developed for their child. Once the LEA has obtained parental consent and before the inital provision of special education and related services, the IEP team would convene a meeting to develop an IEP for the child in accordance with 34 CFR Sections 300.320 through 300.324.

What About a Guardian Ad Litem?

This is a random picture I took while traveling from the Cairo International Airport to our hotel. Notice all the sand on the road...

Page 46566 of the comments to the IDEA 2004 regulations explains "We agree that guardians with limited appointments that do not qualify them to act as a parent of the child generally, or do not authorize them to make educational decisions for the child, should not be considered to be a parent within the meaning of these regulations." What this means...there are differnt kinds of guardians who serve in different roles as authorized by the State. In South Carolina, a Guardian ad Litem is a volunteer trained to perform five important functions: investigator, reporter, spokesperson, monitor, and protector. This person would not be able to make educational decisions on behalf of the child (e.g., receive notice, give or revoke consent, file formal complaints, request mediation, file for a due process hearing, give or deny permission for release of records, etc.) unless a court authorized them to act as a child's parent. If in doubt, school officials need to ask for documentation from a court authorizing the guardian to make educational decisions.