Over on EdWize (the United Federation of Teachers’ blog), Cheryl M. Richardson has a post about purported changes in the IEP procedures that sound at least alarming if not illegal to me. She explains that IEPs could be conducted without teachers. How could NY do this?
The New York State Education Department has proposed that IEP meetings be conducted without the participation of the special and general education teachers or members of the IEP team, - the social worker, psychologist, and related service providers. This change, if voted on, would mean that a child’s IEP could be changed without the knowledge of the participants stated previously. As a special education teacher, as well as, a parent of a child with an IEP, this is an outrage!
Could NY be seeking some special exemption from IDEA? I think the law is pretty explicit about the composition of the IEP team. Here’s the US Department of Education’s description of the changes in description of the team based on the 2004 reauthorization:
1. Revises language regarding members of the IEP team.
The term “IEP team” means a group of individuals composed of:
• The parents of a child with a disability;
• Not less than one regular education teacher of such child (if the child is, or may be,
participating in the regular education environment);
• Not less than one special education teacher, or where appropriate, not less than one
special education provider of such child;
…[more]….
There are two situations where the team can differ: when the (a) topic of the meeting is not relevant to that person’s expertise (curriculum area or such) and (b) when the person submits written input. Both conditions require the parents and local education agency to concur about the team member not attending.
I searched the New York State Deparment of Education for a policy document on this change, but didn’t find one. If someone has further information about the proposed change, please let me know.
Link to Ms. Richardson’s post. Download a PDF of the US ED document from which I quoted.
Sphere: Related Content
Hello,
This is indeed an outrage. But as retired district supervisor of special education services I am not suprised to find that schools are trying to “dodge” the requirements of the IDEA. It is the States responsiblity to make sure that students recieve their civil rights to due process in getting a free and appropriate pubic education. Local districts and cities follow State guidlines and mandates that are based on Federal Law (IDEA). Often one finds that the alignment of the three governing bodies (Fed, State, Local) is very poor.
In my experince this breakdown of alignment happens most often at the local level with individual schools simply refusing to follow (or even understand) the law because they see it as too expensive, inconvient and/or unnessesary. The only way that parents and teachers have been able to deal with these situations has been through litiagion. Unfortunatly, the individual schools will be supported by the district or Region. The City would like nothing better than to streamline the evaluation and assessment processes in regard to students with special needs. This process takes time, training, teacher hours and leads (if done correctly) to fundemental changes in how the school teachers all students.
Properly managing an IEP is a dynamic and creative collaborative, cooperative process that is the design center piece of the origional IDEA in 1975 called The Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Watering down the assessment part of the IEP
is the worst thing that could be done. In special education Assessement is everything, it directs and drives instruction with magnifide and distinctive focus on strengh and needs and that makes progress not just a possibility buy a probobility. it is very scientific. You can’t take a step or two out of the scientific process and still expect the space ship to fly or the get accuate results. Don’t let them take away our rights!
Lucasbaker, thanks for the comment on this matter. I agree that if the allegations are true, they are very problemsome and I especially like your metaphor: “You can’t take a step or two out of the scientific process and still expect the space ship to fly or the get accuate results.”
Kombiz replied to my inquiry on the EdWize site, pointing at a document that, using confusing writing, described a change in the IEP team procedures. It sounds like the change is in line with the extract I posted in the original.
Do you have any evidence that would bear on the issue in the post on the United Federation of Teachers site?
JohnL