Special Education and Public School and or Charter School Administration Pressure.

[Jefferson23]

I would appreciate anyone who would share their knowledge and or experiences, (no names or places necessary please)
regarding special education administrator's pressuring teachers to not give their independent voices
at PPT's on behalf of the children.

I am hearing from a family friend, they are experiencing a living hell trying to get services and there appears to be
a serious level of complicity among staff involving nefarious shenanigans.

What the fuck has this deteriorated to in this country???

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. Can you define PPTs?

Special Ed is a moral and ethical swamp; this much I can tell you.

But what's PPT?

[NYC_SKP]

2. PPT = Planning and Placement Team

Teachers being told to "watch what they say" during PPT meetings, I think, in this case.

Very wrong.

[Jefferson23]

4. Thank you for explaining the meaning. I should have defined it earlier.

Yes to the rest of what you say here too. As it has been explained to me, there are serious
attempts orchestrated to intimidate and bamboozle the parents. That is not something
teachers are ever likely to do on their own.

There must be a terrible undercurrent of pressure applied to get their co-operation is my guess..and why I put up this thread.



Special education law is to some degree about perception, the "team" is suppose to decide together
what is appropriate for the child.

What I'm hearing is attempts to smear the parents and discredit independent evaluations they supplied the Board of Ed.

[NYC_SKP]

5. In my experience, the pressure would be to avoid providing services to a student.

While never asked to lie, I have been witness to efforts on the parts of different players to push evaluations one way or another.

I'm not sure what advantage smearing the parents would have because their input is not from a trained professional point of view.

But I can imagine where it might be tried nonetheless, or just to intimidate them into backing off trying to get services for their child.

[Smarmie Doofus]

6. This is one example of why "reform" is not REFORM.

The fewer job protections teachers have the less efficiently they are going to be able to advocate FOR the child, esp when the child's interest conflicts with the interest of the school/admins/district.

(Let's face facts: the child's interest is ALWAYS in conflict... to one degree or another....with the interest of schools/admins/district.)

Nervous teachers make poor child advocates. Pretty self-evident, one would think , but try explaining this to a Rhee, Klein, Duncan or Obama.


We don't have PPTs ... as you define it... in this system. We do annual IEP reviews in the school ( basically the teacher, an admin rep and the parent) with "triennials" every three... for which the whole eval/prescription thing is done from scratch.


I don't know about "smearing" parents but there is certainly game playing surrounding provision of special services ( I think this is what you mean?) like speech , counseling, OT, etc. The game playing is less likely to be played out at the meeting than it is to show up in the actual provision of services. (e.g. the kid may simply not be 'seen" by a provider for an extended period of time. Teacher may or may not be aware of it. Note: we have a lot of other stuff to keep track of besides whether or not or how often a kid is being serviced by *other* personnel.).

It's fair to assume... it seems to me.... that money is already budgeted for all mandated services. Where that money goes is a good question, and a sensitive one for people who work in administration. I've brought it up *on occasion*. ( One has to pick and choose battles of this sort *veeerry* carefully.) With mixed results.

>>>
>>>>There must be a terrible undercurrent of pressure applied to get their co-operation is my guess..and why I put up this thread.>>>>

There's always pressure. It's implied; built into the relationship between teacher/admin. Principal doesn't have to say "watch what you say".

I've been on both sides of this issue... i.e. as provider and consumer. That's how it seems to work HERE.

[Jefferson23]

11. You're striking on what I suspect is the problem too, mostly

about money, yep. These parents will probably prevail in the end, as the daughter has a diagnosis the school
is plain stupid to deny eligibility. But they drag it out endlessly it seems and the cost to the parents for
attorney fees and the stress is huge. The administration trying to wear them down, very sad.

Again, it is the pressure placed upon the teachers that disturbs me the most, they need more protection
to sustain themselves as an independent voice, not less.

I agree about Duncan and the rest with you too.

[NYC_SKP]

3. While I haven't experienced it personally as a teacher or in management...

...I'm sure it occurs.

It should be documented and reported.

Of course the teachers doing the documenting stand to get plenty of grief for reporting it, and how it should be reported probably varies from state to state but I feel pretty sure it's not uncommon.

Needless to say, teachers have the best data to share, or at least data that just isn't going to be available to resource specialists who don't spend as much time as the teacher does with these students.

Good luck for your friend and their child.

[Jefferson23]

10. The parents are by law participants in the team, and are not suppose

to have their lack of credentials a reason to dismiss their concerns.

And it looks like the smearing of the parents may have more to do with intimidating
them to drop the pressure they have placed on the school.

On edit, Thank you for the best wishes for the child!

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. Every state has a parent association for sped parents

It's funded by federal sped money.

Find that parent group for your state. They will provide advocates and help this parent through the placement process.

Good luck.

[Jefferson23]

9. Thank you for the kind words of support. Unfortunately the

situation has become so difficult for the parents they have hired an attorney.

Of course this is not at all unusual, but what deeply troubled me is what is going on behind the
scenes with the administrators. The principal and special ed director appear to be working in concert
to deny services, cast doubt on the parents concerns and I suspect the pressure on the teachers to go along
is enormous.

There seems to be a myth that teachers are not subject to coercion because of tenure. If it is
bad enough with tenure, what will happen to the children if that protection is further eroded?

I am becoming convinced teachers need some level of protection from administration in
line with whistle blower laws. I'm not familiar with the how those would apply or not,
but something is rotten here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. It doesn't have anything to do with tenure

They can and do make your life miserable if you go against the administration. I see it over and over. They move high school teachers with 40 years in the system to a 1st grade position. They move high school sped teachers to a kdg self-contained class with kids on feeding tubes and wearing diapers. They move seasoned veterans in elementary schools to high school positions. This is how they fight back.

That's why I don't advise parents in these kinds of situations. I refer them to our state parent group. And when I retire, I plan on volunteering with that group. They do great work.

[Jefferson23]

14. Great information! I believe the general public presumes the kind

of fallout you describe would never happen to a tenured teacher.

Teachers need much more protection to act in the best interests of their students.

The odds of that happening in this political climate seem next to impossible...thank you Arne Duncan the schmuck.

Kudos to you for your advocacy.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. This crap has been going on since long before Arne came along

Sadly.

[Jefferson23]

18. I know, but my point is he is trying to dissolve what little protections teachers

have now. I think it's going to get much worse under Arne, not good for the children nor teachers.

[Smarmie Doofus]

20. Tenure helps.

I wouldn't say and do a lot of the things I say and do at work if there weren't a viable union contract and *tenure*.

Yes , they can keep you around for torture. But then, you can torture them, also.

Tenure *rocks*. Good for the teacher AND... in the last analysis, good for the kids also.

[LWolf]

8. I don't have those kinds of stories.

The only time I ever experienced any kind of pressure relating to special ed kids was when I was working in CA. We were pressured not to recommend students for testing, or to bring them to SSTs for that purpose, because the district didn't have the funding to serve any more students than were already on the books.

One of the reasons there was a high number of students recommended for special ed services is because schools and class sizes were large, and there were no other resources to give kids extra time and attention when they needed it, outside of the services offered to students with IEPs.

My current district, in another state, is very open to helping kids in a variety of ways, and encourages teachers to bring any student there is a concern about to SST, regardless of possible special ed services.

Edited to add: in CA, an "SST" was a "Student Study Team." In my current district in Oregon, it's a "Student Support Team."

[Jefferson23]

12. I don't doubt the reasons you state for the high number recommended

for a second. The teachers are now being blamed for everything, this is just another avenue for it imo.

You say you were pressured, if you don't mind, what exactly did they do or say to you or other staff?

[LWolf]

15. Keep in mind that this was 6 or 7 years ago.

I left that district, and the state, to work where I am now.

We were told point blank by the district psychologist, and our principal, to stop asking for students to be assessed for special ed qualification when we took them to SST meetings.

[Jefferson23]

16. Incredible, and another reason I believe teachers need more protection.

Maybe I'm naive, but I don't believe most people understand how and why it works this way. If they did, they might
possibly fight harder for teacher protection from administrators who are driven by budget.

The public option and more money for public schools we need, instead we get Arne Duncan.

[MichiganVote]

19. It might to help to know what kind of services the family needs help with.

In my experience the families often fail to read their parent rights handout. It contains a lot of information that can be very useful.

In general there are two options that parents may utilize in the event of a disagreement about the multidisciplinary evaluation. One is to ask for an independent evaluation and the other is to ask for mediation.

If the family has asked verbally for an evaluation and they have not received a meeting to discuss that option, they should put their request in writing. Don't forget the date as that is key to understanding that under the law, districts must respond promptly, usually within 7 school days.

There is a provision under the law to permit members of the IEP team to write a letter of dissent re: certification and /or programming and services. While it is not common it does sometimes happen.

Teachers, however, do not determine whether a student meets the eligibility requirements. That is the job of the MET, Multidisciplinary Evaluation Team. The law also indicates who is required to be a part of that team depending on the area of certification being examined. Teachers are a part of the MET team in terms of what information they provide. They are not responsible for final determination.

[Jefferson23]

21. I think you're correct about the procedural issue's, but this family

has a denial of FAPE on more than one level from what I understand.

The teachers are being used by the administration it appears to give this family the run around, make them look uncooperative,
suggest they lie..it's pretty ugly. The parents have agreed to the schools request for their staff to evaluate the child, but they
are given the run around as well as ignoring independent evaluations by those much more qualified than their school psychologist.

Some of this activity in the end will amount to bullshit. The child has a diagnosis the school should have accepted and
immediately began to set up a transition plan to have her come smoothly into their system. Instead they delay and are costing this
family great hardship,(need for an attorney) never mind the stress.

[MichiganVote]

25. A couple of things......

First, the school system has both the responsibility and the right to perform their evaluation before an independent evaluation is conducted. Second, a school Psychologist must meet certain State criteria in order to be qualified. Once they meet those criteria they are considered qualified whether parents or others are happy about it or not. Many times people who are dissatisfied with a certain member of a MET team and want someone more "qualified" of their choice are dismayed to learn that the independent evaluator must also follow the state guidelines. However, a competent school Psychologist will certainly take into consideration the information that a medical or mental clinician provides along with the other data.

Second, and this is the hard one for people to understand...a child is NOT certified on the basis of a Diagnosis from a medical or from a mental health clinician. ALL students considered eligible for SPED services must show that they have a significant problem with academic achievement despite interventions. I note in the succeeding posts that a discussion of RTI was begun. This is and will be the model in Michigan and many other states.

The fact is Special Education law is complex, often contentious and usually confusing to parents and community caregivers. Physicians who are accustomed to being able to write a prescription for a specific treatment plan are sometimes a family's worst enemy. In an effort to help a family, they give parents the impression that whatever the Dr. says the child could or should have---they will have. Sometimes they go so far as to write the special education services on a prescription pad. For people who are supposed to have a strong intellect, that's pretty lame.

I hope your family and their child are able to resolve their difficulties. I grant you that some professionals are not 'in the know' as well as others. Happens everywhere. But I have worked with many families who while their child did not meet the eligibility guidelines still came away assured that their child's needs would not be ignored.

[Jefferson23]

27. I disagree with you on the qualifications, meeting criteria to perform

many evaluations is one thing, being qualified to diagnose is another. There are significant and relevant distinctions regarding clinicians having a Ph.D vs a masters degree ( a masters is what you generally see in public school). In this case the school is transitioning their child into their system; they are suppose to consider the diagnosis, in this case it is autism. The parents have agreed to their evaluations and
that is where the nefarious shenanigans I mentioned began by the school staff.

You're correct the school does not have to accept all the recommendations, but if they decide to ignore the qualifications
of the examiners and the diagnosis and deny as in this case eligibility, they will be screwed and royally.

RTI is new to me, and I'm no expert in this area at all, but I do question how the integrity of IDEA will be
maintained with such a model. On it's face it appears more than a little scary.

[MichiganVote]

28. Jefferson, believe me, I've been there on this issue a thousand times

And not meaning to sound belittling...you can have God diagnose a kid whatever and the Federal and State criteria for persons qualified to perform a school based evaluation will include (for Autism) at least one school Psychologist and one School Social Worker and one school based Speech and Language therapist. An independent evaluation by persons outside the educational community must structure their evaluation according to state regulations.

The difference is that the school team is not "diagnosing" anyone. They are supposed to evaluate whether or to what extent a child meets the eligibility criteria that the State demands WHICH will include more than issues/problems observed in the home environment.

Suggest that you and the family specifically ask for the special education criteria for certification of ASD in the area. There are two systems in cases like this. One is often the medical community and the other is the educational community. Throw in Community Mental Health and you have three systems. All of them are different and all of them have a different expectations based on the criteria that they work with.

[Jefferson23]

29. First, I don't get the impression you're meaning to sound belittling, not

at all.

But are you suggesting that the school can deny eligibility for a child with a diagnosis of autism by Ph. D's
and a special ed hearing will rule in favor of the school??

What is going on in this case the family believes are school administrators trying to intimidate the family
to just go away. This child is going to cost them big money, their daughter's deficits are significant and
pronounced.

[MichiganVote]

30. Thank you. I try not to get funny where kids are concerned.

Now to business.

"But are you suggesting that the school can deny eligibility for a child with a diagnosis of autism by Ph. D's and a special ed hearing will rule in favor of the school??"

Yup. Can and does happen provided the school has done a through eval.and proven their case. A diagnosis alone by anyone does not meet the eligibility criteria and any attorney who tells the family that this is wrong is wasting their time and money. There is a real cottage industry of advocates and attorneys who work these types of things. Some are reputable and honest and some are not. So tell the family to have a care. Not saying they should not pursue it but they don't need a charlatan.

If the daughter's deficits are significant and pronounced AND interfere with her academic progress, an eval.should be a no brainer and in that case the district has not fulfilled their duty under the law.

If, however, the child is functional in the school environment, largely able to handle a regular school day among her peers with moderate support, she may need a plan to support her social needs but not special education for her academics. And if that's the case, great! That's success for the kid and we all want that.

You might check out Wright's Law on the web for more details.

Good luck!

[Jefferson23]

31. If they or any state can deny eligibility with a diagnosis of autism, we are in worse

shape than I previously thought.

Her parents would give their right arms and legs for her to be functional in a school environment.

I will check out the Wright's Law, thanks for that, the conversation, and the best wishes for the child.

on edit for clarity.

[MichiganVote]

32. You're welcome.

[erinlough]

22. Right here in our state

we have just moved from a discrepancy model to a model which requires that for a student to receive special education services the student must show inability in three areas. Testing may be used, but also teacher data. In fact we have been told that the psychologists and teacher consultants from the RESA (regional educational service agency) will no longer test each special education students and it will be the regular educator's job.

Upon asking for help, in my experience, the parent will have to wait about 6 weeks to three months for the team to: implement corrective actions via regular education (called tier 1 interventions), assess the students progress and if not enough growth is made institute another level of intervention, (tier 2 intervention), and so on. It isn't until Tier 4 and no progress that special education even becomes involved.

This approach is called RTI, Response to Intervention. This approach is being pushed by Duncan/Obama. Not all Intermediate School Districts are going to this but many are. My observation is that many parents get very upset, and rightfully so, with the slowness of the process. It does what it is intended to do.....eliminate educating expensive special education students. The days of helping a child by bringing in another professional are over and soon all special education will be as well. The responsibility will be on the regular education teacher who will have a maximum number of students, fewer supplies, and more expected of them than ever before.

This is the big new idea, and the only people who can stop it are the parents. They need to organize and do it now. Teachers have had no say in this move, even though we have complained. Teachers will never again have that kind of say. We are just told what is, never consulted.

[Jefferson23]

23. Wow, that is beyond scary. I would love to know how the hell they

anticipate RTI can coexist with IDEA....makes no sense to me.

[erinlough]

24. I'm waiting to see...

This will be the first year for our county to go to this, but I agree it pretty much flies in the face of IDEA. I spoke with someone from Nevada on here and they had been using it for a few years. She said the students she got in her special education class were more severe, but she still had students. I could see my district (a tiny one) going from 8 special education teachers K-12 down to 6 in a relatively short time (like a year). Administrators hate this plan also. They have to buy intervention programs for the various tiers. The crazy thing is that only the special ed teachers know about this, no one has even attempted to train the regular education teachers in any of the new techniques they are going to be required to use! I have informed my staff members, and my Principal. If I had not, they would have never known.

[Jefferson23]

33. Since no one in regular ed is being trained in any of the new techniques

are the teachers being asked to use them at present in the mean time? If so wouldn't
that invalidate or at least highly compromise the outcome?

I recall reading Arne Duncan mentioned he wanted to see how more regular teachers would be utilized in
special ed.

[MichiganVote]

34. Not sure what you mean by new techniques. The basis of RTI is to use

research based techniques, some of which will be used in a classroom and likely others in a Title I program.

Arne Duncan doesn't know the first damn thing about Special Education. He's a jock, a moron and a billionaire ass kisser. Total disgust.

[Jefferson23]

35. I was referring to what the poster stated about the regular ed teachers

not being trained to use those tiers but were being required implement them regardless. Perhaps I misunderstood?

I wondered how legitimate/reliable the results would be without training the reg ed teachers before they used them.

Agree about Duncan, completely.

[erinlough]

36. The teachers are doing the best they can as they go along

because they are being told that without interventions the student they are concerned with will not receive special education services. Do I think this is right or valid? NO! but, without a training program in place, and this approach beginning for us this year, they are doing the best they can. The attempts are creative and real, and I know these teachers are doing the best they can to comply. I spoke out two years ago to the administration at our school that this was coming and they needed to be prepared, but nothing was done. It was as if they didn't believe me, a lowly teacher, but they are scrambling now and in a couple of years we will have the needed programs in place, maybe even shorter. I think this will work out eventually, but right now it is frustrating.

[Jefferson23]

37. You lay out what I suspect many parents don't know. The administration

in the public school's are consistently dumping on teachers in more ways than one.

I don't doubt the teachers are trying their best, but they are being branded with the blame. This needs
a heavy dose of exposure imo and the teachers don't have enough job protection to do it themselves.

In the mean time, the parents will need an attorney to fight for FAPE, more often than not it appears.

[MichiganVote]

26. You know I grant you, the discrepency model was easy. Test, you're in or you're out.

BUT.

It also ruled kids out of services and on the basis of about two tests, it did not measure progress or the interventions that teachers were trying. Not a very scientific method of demonstrating who has an educational disability and who does not. The fact is the Feds and the states are moving away from many of the disability subsections that have been around. Math calculation? This one in particular will be axed in the near future.

RTI is very labor intensive, true. And at a time when Itinerant staff is at a premium, teachers will share a bigger piece of the pie in terms of data collection.

Wish I could tell you it will be different but don't count on it.