lip service from the school

Post Reply New Topic

My 9yo son has Asperger's Syndrome and is in a general classroom full time. He has an IEP which the school feels is "open to interpretation." I keep having meetings with the teachers and administration at my son's school where they say they understand what my son needs and agree to accommodations and interventions, but they don't follow through and are very inconsistent, with each person who works with him basically doing their own thing.

For example, a couple of months ago the school agreed to use social stories to help my son work through frustrating incidences, and his therapist came to the school to go over the process with them. Everyone agreed to that plan. What they are actually doing is they have created a little flip book of 3x5 cards with sayings like "I will not hit if someone cuts in line" and they make him read through the book when he arrives at school each morning. If he has a meltdown they follow their regular discipline procedure, which usually means in-school suspension (he's had 4 of them since September). I told them that he needs to have a non-verbal signal for the teacher when he feels that he's getting frustrated - I was thinking a thumbs down hand signal or something similar - and they made him a stop light card (red, yellow, and green circles) that he is to keep in his desk and pull out to point at the appropriate color if he's feeling flustered.

I don't know how to get through to the school. I am offended (to say the least) that they are basically lying to my face. I feel like I have to drop by the school to spy on them. Short of pulling my son from school - I have discussed it with him and he gets really upset because he doesn't want to lose his friends - is there anything I can do? He's only at this school for another year. It's killing me dealing with these people.

Is it written in the IEP explicitly that they will use the social story system and how it will be used. When I hear open for interpretation, that means that the language is not clear enough. The language in the IEP needs to be so clear that a 5 year old would understand it.

There is an area of the IEP for parents comments and you have the right to fill that in. Exercise it. Make sure that the language is explicit.

They are required by law to follow the IEP. If you have to spy, then spy. If you have to remind them that they are required by law to follow the IEP, then remind them.

I would take notes on the things you feel are not being done in accordance with the IEP and other agreements, decide on specific actions the school can do to fix those variances (ideas that are practical), and then request a meeting. Matter of factly point out each variance, and follow up with the suggestion. If they don't like your suggestion, tell them that you want to know what they recommend instead. If they don't have that answer, tell them that you would like another meeting at date/time X and that you expect to hear their answer then. If they continue to hem and haw instead of brainstorming with you, then remind them that the law is on your side. If that still doesn't get anywhere, be more specific: we have a family on this board that filed a complaint and got action, and it was not a happy situation for the school.

Note that I use the term brainstorm intentionally; while a parent should go into the meeting with suggestions that they honestly believe are actionable, it is important to be open to modifying those ideas so that the teachers are comfortable things will work in their unique classroom. But the teachers have to be willing to work with you, too, if you are going to be flexible for them. I've been really lucky that pretty much all of ours have been; you can feel it in the meeting when they want to do right by your child, and you go with it.

But sometimes you get someone that is simply a rock and you've got to bring in the heavy equipment. Not nice when that happens, but stay calm and stay cool and note that the meeting won't be over until either you have an actionable agreement or have set a date for the next meeting.

If there are behaviors that are interfering with your son's ability to benefit from his education, which it sounds like there are (otherwise he wouldn't be getting suspensions), your son should have an FBA (functional behavioral assessment) done by a certified behavioral analyst performed. Based on the findings of the FBA, a positive BIP (behavioral intervention plan) should be established, which would be used by all teachers/staff working with your son, in order to support positive behavior and diminish unwanted behavior (like hitting). The plan, as noted, is based on positive supports, not punishments. The FBA cannot be done by the classroom or special ed teacher - it has to be a certified behavior analyst who is coming in from outside the classroom situation, who observes over the course of, usually, several weeks, and speaks with numerous people, including the parent and sometimes even the child. A good FBA can be an excellent tool, and can be the basis for a good BIP - it can make a world of difference! This should not be something that is up to the school - it should be automatic with a child having behavioral challenges.

Thanks for your responses! I've never heard of an FBA - I'll have to look into that.

When I mean the school feels my son's IEP is "open to interpretation," I mean they think they can ignore it. For example, it states explicitly that his ed tech needs to be within earshot at all periods of transition including in hallways, in the lunchroom, and on the playground. The school seems to think it's okay if the class moves through the school with the teacher at the beginning of the line, his ed tech at the end, and my son somewhere in the middle. I think it's great that they are integrating him so fully, but there's no way he's "within earshot" if the adults are 15 kids away. And if something does escalate (some of his classmates think it's hilarious to see him fly off the handle) then he's immediately the principal and I get a call about it. Literally the first thing out of my mouth in every single time is "where was his ed tech?" and she was never where she was supposed to be - but if he violates the zero-tolerance policy, "their hands are tied."

I have an IEP meeting next Thursday. If I point out all the discrepancies, then the meeting will be all about them defending their practices instead of figuring out what's best for my son. It just seems pointless, because they'll agree to everything I say but then forget all about it as soon as I leave the room. And the worst thing about it is that my son's a different kid when he gets what he needs - he's kind and funny and engaged in class discussions. Socially it's a different matter. But if the school got it together he'd be a perfect student. I've seen the transformation in the past, but unfortunately as soon as the previous school figured him out he graduated to the next one. It's so maddening...

I'm flabbergasted.

The IDEA law clearly states that your son needs to be accomodated in 'the least restrictive environment'. A zero-tolerance policy is NOT appropriate for a child with documented behavioral challenges. The IDEA law has specific provisions for this:

1. Add a new authority for school personnel to consider unique circumstances.
"School personnel may consider any unique circumstances on a case-by-case basis when determining whether a change in placement, consistent with the other requirements of 34 CFR 300.530, is appropriate for a child with a disability who violates a code of student conduct.
[34 CFR 300.530(a)] [20 U.S.C. 1415(k)(1)(A)]"

The page at the US Dept of Education the quote is taken from.
http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Cro ... ief%2C6%2C

You also have the right to request changes and review of your son's IEP at any time if you feel it is inadequate or that his needs are not being met. I'm in the middle of my daughter's revised IEP at the moment so I'm fighting some of the same battles. Make all requests in writing and copy everything you request of the school to the special education coordinator for the district and also to the superintendant. Ignorance is no excuse and that is exactly what it sounds like is going on with that school.

In addition to what draelynn accurately advised, you need to start documenting everything. Nothing was said if it wasn't in writing, so if you have a conversation with someone, you need to follow it up with a letter (email is fine), for instance: "As we discussed this afternoon, I am very concerned about what happened in school today. When Johnny was [whatever Johnny was doing], I am still unclear about why the ed tech was where the ed tech was. As I understand it, the ed tech is supposed to be within ear shot whenever Johnny is transitioning. This event occurred when the class was moving from x to y, which is clearly a transition, and from what I was told, Johnny was in the middle of the line and the ed tech was at the end of the line. She could not, therefore, have heard the substance of any conversation in which Johnny was engaged. It is essential that this provision, as all provisions, of Johnny's IEP be followed so that Johnny receive the FAPE to which he is entitled by law. Thank you for your cooperation in seeing that Johnny's IEP is followed in the future." Check out Wrightslaw for information about how to write a "letter to a stranger" and for information about legal rights.

Thanks again, and yes I document everything. The last time my son had an incident I asked him what happened that lead up to it, and he said he was kicked twice in the face. Of course, I assumed he was projecting a bit, but there's no way I'm going to let something like that go, so I immediately emailed the principal, and got no response. I waited, making excuses in my mind that she was really busy, but after two weeks I forwarded my original email to her asking for a report. Still no response from the principal, but his special ed teacher emailed me to say he was never touched. Again, I'm glad it didn't actually happen and dismayed that he described the incident so violently, but it is completely outrageous that I have not gotten responses from the principal.

Just to play devil's advocate, I can see where "within ear shot" isn't terribly clear - not that this excuses them, because if something isn't working, they should fix it instead of shuffling the responsibility onto a child.

I would ask to change the IEP to state something like "next to the teacher/ed tech when walking in lines" or "in the desk nearest the teacher/ed tech in the classroom" etc. Make the proximity you think is necessary be more specific.