IEP changing to every 3 years

The new law (if it passes through as is) will take in account that changes will need to be implemented and that annual reviews will be needed. A parents right to request an IEP review will remain. Please go the wrightslaw.com website and they have a very plainly written explanation of the changes that may take place with the reauthorization.

Laurie

I couldn’t down load it , a problem I have with my computer and have not been able to fix yet. I hope you are right because it seems from other sources I have read they do not seem to think so.-

From wrightslaw.com:

“614(d)(5) MULTI - YEAR IEP (page 124)
LEA may offer to the parent the option of developing a comprehensive multi-year IEP not to exceed 3 years in duration, designed to cover the natural transitions for the child….There will be a “streamlined annual review” that determines current levels of progress and whether annual goals are being achieved. The IEP will be amended as appropriate.”

From what I gather the multi-year IEP will be an option only. If you are able I would definitely download this document from the website. Lots of other changes will be taking place as well.

Laurie

So much for NCLB Act. It is all a big joke. We can not count on NCLB to help our children . It seems like everything is taking a step back instead of foward.I have no faith in our system at all, all they try to do when you try to help your child is give us BS. They only way one can be sure the IEP is being followed is to be at school with them every day. It only gets worse as the grade’s go up. High School is the worse, nobody cares. It is all big joke. And they all ask the question WHY do so many LD students drop out of School . I could tell you why, it is not a hard question.

As I read all the “new” laws, etc., I find that it will STILL be up to the parent to be responsible for COMPLIANCE. - Even though it “sounds like” the schools will be responsible for this - as you all know, if we aren’t “informed” and “educated” our kids will be sent out to sea on the SE boat and never seen/heard from again.

I like the “early detection”. My daughter would have been identified in K-5 IF she had been given a real test (BTW, they gave her a pre-screening, which she passed). I understand, after talking to a friend, advocate, mediator, what the “purpose” of it is. To grab those kids who don’t meet the IQ/achievement discrepancy at an early age. (the vast majority of students) Before 3rd grade. Which is a very good thing.

Her example was (and this is based on a 40-ish memory) if a kid can’t tie his shoes, we try teaching him to tie his shoes, double loop style if necessary. If after continuing work he still can’t tie his shoes, we will give him loafers. BUT HE WON’T GO WITHOUT SHOES.

She said many kids are LD b/c of this discrepancy and IF the school does what it is supposed to do, early on, they will never get to the LD label. They are NOT disabled, they brains work differently and they CAN BE TAUGHT - using the RIGHT programs. Research based, etc.

OF COURSE, we parents know the school is notorious for NOT doing what they are supposed to do. I have not had any problems getting them to agree to services, or even getting it on the IEP, the problem has been over and over, COMPLIANCE with the IEP.

BTW, this very intelligent mediator is dyslexic and has a special needs daughter in public school.

In theory, the early detection sounds good. As Victoria pointed out, so does “balanced literacy”. It will still be up to the parent to be the advocate for that child and make sure the student gets what they, by law, are entitled to.

Don’t shoot the messenger.