School discontinue IEP 4 grade levels behind???

OKay Carol,
they CAN NOT under the law, state that they want to discontinue her LD status,because they have nothing else to offer her. THey MUST offer her something,if they do not have it in public school they must provide it privately. I suggest that you read IDEA laws,familiarize yourself ,because they are given you a crock. Check my site out for inforamtion on this Law and other tips on Parental advocacy.
Http://specialedmom.homestead.com/index.html
Please keep me posted,they can not do this legally. Good Luck

Carol,
I can’t help with your school situation (Socks would be the expert anyway!) but have you read “Dyslexia: The Gift by Ron Davis with Eldon Braun? If you see your child in his description of dyslexia, she might benefit from the Davis methods of correcting dyslexia. If you haven’t read it, I can recommend it.

A savvy resource teacher began using some of these methods with my son last year in first grade and although we have a ways to go, he is managing in a regular classroom — without the symbol mastery work I don’t believe that would be happening. Davis methods have had great success with older children and adults, as they teach the dyslexic to correct the underlying problem while providing specific multi-sensory help to master the symbols and bring reading up to grade level, sometimes VERY quickly.

Whatever happens, good luck — don’t let the school get away with anything!

Hi Carol,

No, they cannot simply change her status because “they have nothing to offer”.

It would be quite a surpise if they put this in writing to you; I would certainly request they put this all in writing, including their reason for why they want to drop her from the current ld status. It is important that you become familiar with the laws and regulations regarding this matter.

If it is absolutely true that they have nothing to offer, then it is abundantly clear they must offer other placement options for your child. Because the district simply lacks a program or placement option, it does not limit their responsibility to provide a FAPE (free appropriate public education).

Either somebody at the school is really not up to speed with the special ed laws and regs, they must really not think much of you (parents in general) or your knowledge of the laws, or be extremely confident in the enforcement of laws.

Anyway, strongly suggesting you get everything in writing and do all your corresponding regarding this matter in writing as well. This matter flies in the face of the fundamental purpose for IEPs, why the laws were written and why districts MUST BE RESPONSIBLE to comply with the laws.

This matter is simply too clear cut the way you posted it, and they are either extremely ignorant of the law, or blatantly displaying their disregard for it.

Proceed forward cautiously, and with proper documentation. Knowledge of the laws and regulations (becoming well versed in them) will only be to your advantage.

A few final thoughts. For her program or placement to be changed, they need to establish a clear cut reason for why this reccomendation is made. They cannot just call/write and notify you that this will be done as of such and such a date. If you dispute the change of program, they need to maintain the current program (the “stay put” something or other) until the dispute would then be resolved through mediation and subsequent due process hearing.

If you are well documented, it would be a field day I would think for the Office of Civil Rights (OCR), let alone a complaint to the Federal Dept. of Ed…

Best regards.

Andy

I cannot divulge my identity because I am in the middle of a major dispute with my son’s school district. He was involved in a discipline issue at school and many policies, procedures, and laws were violated. I have sent a 6 page letter outlining at least 7 violations of IDEA (special ed law), a request to the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Office of Civil Rights (OCR).
Please go out ASAP and buy this book. I am also a special ed teacher and “thought” I knew the law, but this book is worth every penny!!!
“Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, by Peter W.D. Wright and Pamela Darr Wright, Harbor House Law Press, ISBN 1-892320-03-7, copyright 1999,2000. Any major book store should be able to order it, in case they don’t carry it. This book contains the reauthorization of IDEA of 1997, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, U.S. Supreme court Decisions and analysis and interpretation.
DO NOT LET THE SCHOOL INTIMIDATE YOU!!! It is their job to do this and try to make you believe they know and “follow” the law. However, through my horrible experience, I have come to realize everyone in the school system only knows: 1) what they learned in college, 2) what they learned from their “on the job training”, 3) what they learned from listening to their supervisors, etc. (who were told what to say), 4) what they were told to say in case a parent disagrees with the school decision. Most school personnel DO NOT understand the laws. REMEMBER: you are an integral part of the IEP team and anytime you DISAGREE, write this on the bottom part of the signature page (usually page 1) of the IEP, state simply your disagreement; then ask for your “Procedural Safeguards”. You must document everything step by step (if only for your recollection and memory). The school will try to document what they did and it will be piecemeal because many different people will have been involved. Then write a letter to your state’s Department of Education outlining your concerns. Find all of your child’s paperwork (since entering special education and put in date order). You also should get a complete copy of your child’s school records (the school will also copy the file ….and don’t hesitate to think they could falsify a document! They did in my son’s case!). The school district is also suppose to give you a list of free and low cost legal assistance; however, they won’t give you the name of a really good special ed attorney because they don’t want you to have it! It is possible to go forward with your complaint without one. But, PLEASE buy and read the book I referenced. Never in my life did I think this could happen to my son, but it did……and because I have dedicated my life to teaching children with special needs, I am going to fight this to the end so it NEVER happens to another child in my district and hopefully my state.
Good luck and God Bless!!! I am sorry I cannot give you my email…..school personnel reads this site.

What she says is true! Go buy Peter’s book (and Pamela), and go through their web site as well www.wrights.law.com

There is much help out there, and there are laws; failure to enforce the law is going to be the largest hurdle for most to overcome.

I neglected to advise in prior post DO NOT SIGN THE IEP IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH IT!

More often than not as soft touch at the time of signing will try to get you to sign it “now”, and if you change your mind, “you can do so later”.

Yes, it is true, you can change your mind later. However, if you haven’t signed it yet, DO NOT SIGN IT. If you go to mediation, a hearing or further, the district more than likely will have shifty representatives who will continue to argue that “they don’t understand the problem”, you agreed with the IEP at that time…

You really need to understand that this is why everything documented is so important.

I would cease and desist from all converstations about the matter of your daughter’s placement if over the phone or in the hallways. Make a point of tape recording your IEP meeting (but be sure to only give 24 hour notice and not one minute more). There is much advise you can be given here prior to going into the meeting, but for right now, you will probably find someone or some persons trying to tell you things to ease your mind or get you to back off. Trust me, and the rest of us who have trusted and been burned by district personell, memories get really foggy and selective when push comes to shove and the line is drawn in the sand.

I would go so far as to suggest that anyone who means well and is looking out for your daughter will tell you that they cannot speak on the record, because it could jeopradize their job… so tread carefully, and do not be too trusting any more.

Remember: You aren’t really paranoid if they are following you!

If there are honorable teachers and administrators out there reading this, you should not be offended (you are desperately needed), you should understand what it is like to be a parent who is being deceived and manipulated by a district with no concern for children or respect for the law.

Good luck.

Andy

ps/ If there is any doubt, once again, here is the story of a special ed teacher, Sheilla Hopper:

The Story of Sheila Hopper Retaliation:
The Dark Side of Special Education
How Education Officials Retaliated Against A Student Advocate

When Congress passed the special education mandate in 1975, it had no idea what kind of organizations would evolve to implement it. Over the years some of these organizations have become powerful bureaucracies with needs that are frequently at odds with the people they serve. At their worst, such organizations can become dysfunctional. The story within the story of Sheila Hopper is about one such system.

Perhaps nothing more separates the officials who control the special education apparatus from the consumers they are supposed to serve than the ugly reality of retaliation. Many stories are known. This is one of the more horrific.

This is not a new story, but it has not been widely told, and it does not seem to have an end. It is the story of a highly professional, knowledgeable, and resourceful teacher who knew too much. She knew too much about federal law, she knew too much about her school district. And, she cared too much.

Shelia Hopper, a resource specialist in the Los Angeles Unified School District, could not ignore the fact that a 5th grade child could not read, write, or even spell her name. In 1988, the child was referred to Sheila for testing. It should have been an easy task to provide the student with needed services. But, when a large bureaucracy is involved, with its hierarchy of power and jealously guarded prerogatives, what should be easy is often impossible. In this case, the needs of the bureaucrats took precedence over the needs of the child.

The special educators that Sheila went to for help did not agree with her that the child needed special education services. Without consulting with Sheila or the child’s parents, a school psychologist declared the student ineligible for special education services. Because she believed the child was being denied services illegally, Sheila filed a complaint against the district in May 1989.

This was not just any district, but the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). LAUSD is big and powerful—a $5 billion enterprise, with relatively unlimited resources. When she filed a complaint against them, Sheila gained a powerful and vindictive adversary. Then Sheila realized that the district routinely held IEP meetings without the classroom teacher present. She filed another complaint. The district was found to be “out of compliance.” When by 1992 the district failed to implement needed changes, Sheila filed yet a third complaint.

The retaliation started long before Sheila’s last complaint. Perhaps the most insidious was in the work environment, where according to Sheila, she experienced a myriad of subtle pressures. Her split duty between two schools continued beyond the point where a single assignment was warranted, her caseload was allowed to grow beyond the mandated limit, causing her waiting list of kids to be tested to stretch to 10 months. But the worst was yet to come.

In March of 1990, Sheila was charged with child abuse. The police could find no evidence of such a crime by a teacher with an impeccable record of performance that stretched for over 15 years of honorable duty.

Charges were immediately dropped. However, the district persevered with its own “investigation.”

According to Sheila, over the next two months the school principal called three or four of her students into the office five, six, or seven times to “interview” them about Sheila. The students were given jelly beans to keep these discussions secret. For some it was a terrifying experience. One child started to cry as he asked Sheila if the principal was trying to get her fired. Another started having nightmares.

Finally the district made its move. Based on the charges that had been earlier dropped, Sheila was given a 15 day suspension, a transfer, and an unsatisfactory performance review. In response, Sheila filed a grievance and in June 1990 the case went into arbitration.

Not only did the arbitrator find in Sheila’s favor, in a rare departure from normal practice, he wrote a scathing commentary citing “professional misconduct” on the part of the district.

As a result, Sheila filed charges against the principal with the California Teacher Credentialing Commission. The Commission recommended a 10 day suspension of the principal’s credentials. The district appealed. The case went before an administrative law judge, with the California Attorney General’s office prosecuting against the district.

A nine day hearing ensued, the outcome of which was a finding that the district did not retaliate against Sheila. Interestingly, the judge had been asked and refused to excuse himself from the case because of an unusual circumstance. He knew Sheila’s husband, who is a medical doctor. An unusual request by the judge had been turned down by Dr. Hopper in his capacity as an HMO manager.

Most people would give up at this point. Fortunately for the rest of us, Sheila did not. She finally got an attorney. He succeeded in getting her a trial before a jury.

In November 1994, following a five day trial, a jury deliberated for an hour and a half and decided in favor of Sheila, finding that the school principal had indeed retaliated against her by falsely accusing her of child abuse. She was awarded $50,000 in general damages and $5,000 in punitive damages. But the district, fueled by a limitless supply of taxpayer money, refused to accept the jury’s decision. They appealed. The jury decision was then overturned by a three judge federal panel.

Sheila is now petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court in an effort to restore the jury conviction and her good name. She will find out in 1997 if the Supreme Court will hear her case. The total spent by LAUSD to prevail over one lone resource room teacher? $565,000, and counting.

Epilogue
What, our readers may wonder, ever became of the child who inspired this incredible story of retaliation? She was of course, placed in a special education program. Sheila was right all along.

[Note: See issue 11 of The Observer for a follow-up story.]

©Special Education Observer

Follow up story:

Retaliation Incident Spurs Action
State Launches Retaliation Investigation
The Joint Legislative Audit Committee last May voted overwhelmingly to launch an investigation into allegations of special education funding misappropriations and retaliation against whistle blowers in the Los Angeles Unified School District (see The Sheila Hopper Story, The Special Education Observer, Issue #9).

The move was initiated by State Assemblymen Steve Baldwin and Jan Goldsmith. According to an article that appeared in the Los Angeles Times (5/21/97), once underway Goldsmith intends to pressure District Attorney, Gil Garcetti to broaden the investigation to include other allegations, such as “fabrication of enrollment numbers to increase state funding.”

Baldwin is quoted in the Daily News (5/21/97) stating “It’s not about one person. It’s about a system of fraud and abuse.”
––––––––––––––––––––––––––—
©Special Education Observer
Front Page
Index
LDA

My daughter has similar disabilities as your daughter does. I fought for the Special Ed. status even though she has only utilized 504 services. She will start 9th grade in high school next year, the older she gets the more limited resources the school provides her. Her 504 teacher has encouraged the Special Ed status for future education in high school and college. I don’t have an answer to your question; however, I would like to ask you if you know of any summer programs designed to introduce university atmosphere to high school students with dyslexia? I’m concerned that my daughter will “give up” on higher education because of all the brick walls she has hit, not to mention the everyday stigmatism of having dyslexia.

Thanks for any help.

Hi,

You will find, as we did, that once you are out of the lower grades, the acceptance of ld matters and making accomodations actually gets better.

Our son is severely dysgraphic. He walked himself into the counseling office and requested they test him for ld at the local jc in our area. They scheduled him, tested him, and then scheduled a meeting to explain results/findings. Oddly enough, discrepancies were almost identical to the ones found in the 1st grade, when the public district fought tooth and nail to ignore, belittle and play down / dumb down.

This time around, he advocates for himself, has access to a fine computer lab, a counselor who he can check in with, and a very positive attitude about school! Amazing.

Anyway, you may want to take your daughter over to a school and just look around. Ask at the counseling center to walk/talk her through what would happen if she enrolled and just go from there.

Our experience AFTER THE LOWER GRADES has been a noticable improvement. Something to look forward to.

Andy

Thanks to everyone who replied. I feel “armed with info” and ready to go. Because I have been an outspoken advocate before, I do feel this may be a retribution or a “get rid of that mother” type of move (Andy). I am going to take a professional advocate with me. She knows LD law, tutors LD students, is starting her own school and is willing to be the “bad guy” for me for a small fee. I am determined not to sign at this meeting. So many papers are “thrown” at the parents at an IEP meeting that I can’t possibly think about the aftereffects of it all! Thanks for all the support and the great ideas!

In case I haven’t mentioned it, TAPE THE MEETING.

Carol, you can give 24 hr. notice and bring a third party to simply be responsible for tape recording the meeting.

Check with your advocate (great job finding one), and do it without animosity or anything other than collecting all the data to review at a later date. The district can also tape the meeting, unless you opt not to.

Anyway, you will be sure to pick up on stuff that you would have missed had you not taped the session.

Good luck.

Andy