How Not to Be a “Ken” Special Education Teacher

Image by PublicDomainPictures on Pixabay.com

Recently, I attended an IEP meeting called by my client’s mom. This client’s mom had good reason to call the IEP meeting rather than trying to simply talk with the teacher. There’s history here.

The Backstory

The client is a 7 year old, non-verbal, severely autistic boy. I’ve been working with him at home since he turned 4 and during the first year of the pandemic. He began attending the school district’s full day special education preschool program when he turned 3 years old. So, he had a year of preschool behind him when the world went remote. He did surprisingly well with online instruction. He was able to sit for 20 minutes at a time, able to use the mouse pad independently, and able to answer questions using a multiple choice format with 2 or 3 options. At home and in-person, I was able to work on teaching him turn-taking and how to play structured games as well as expand his ability to use a tablet-based SGD app (which he was able to quickly pick up). His mom and I had a discussion about which app to choose and we decided to choose the app the school district uses with almost all students on the autism spectrum who use AAC to communicate, Proloquo2Go.

For the most part, this client’s preschool teachers were amazing. For the most part. I attended his kindergarten transition IEP at his mom’s request. We asked about the possibility of getting a tablet with the same SGD app to make it easier for the client to communicate in the classroom. After all, that was what we’d spent the last year working on to make it easier for both the client and the teachers. I was absolutely floored when the “speech therapist” said something to the effect of, “It’s the district’s policy that all non-verbal students get PECS in kindergarten. No one gets a tablet.” (If you know anything about federal special education law, you know how blatantly against federal special education law that statement is!)

The school district’s position and policy on kindergartners’ use of SGDs in the classroom environment meant the client was forced to learn a modified PECS system during kindergarten. He already had the skill to recognize icons and to request using them. But, put yourself in this child’s shoes for just a minute. You’re non-verbal, severely autistic, and have been learning to use a dynamic display device as your voice and doing well with it. Then, just because you turned 5 years old and are starting kindergarten, you have to learn an entirely new way of communicating along with a new routine and expectations after having been at home for a year.

This client’s kindergarten year was his first year with his current teacher, a male special education teacher recruited from the Philippines. Now, I’m learning Spanish myself. I conduct a therapy sessions in Spanish with a couple of my clients. But, I recognize that I have limited Spanish proficiency, especially with adults. So, I hope you will understand when I say that this teacher’s English proficiency is not optimal for the position he is in. There also are clearly some cultural differences in interactions, especially between men and women. And, it’s clear that this teacher does not appreciate involved parents. It’s clear he perceives involved parents as trying to micromanage what is happening in his classroom.

The client’s mom is very involved – in all the best ways. She sits in on my therapy sessions so she can see what I’m doing so she can do it too. She wants to make sure we home-based therapists are aware of the IEP goals and that the school is aware of the home-based goals. She does this so things can be coordinated as much as possible to ensure the best outcomes for her son. She really, really tries to be an equal partner in the therapy process. She really would like to go to school to become a special education teacher. I wish more parents were like her.

However, her desire to be involved has not gone over well with the teacher.

The client finally was issued a tablet with the same SGD app I’ve been using with him at the end of his kindergarten year. Until we were able to get the client his own device a couple of months ago, the school-issued device went from home to school and the family was responsible for charging it and returning it to school each day. The family was very diligent about making sure the client has his tablet everyday and his mom made note of the amount of charge on the tablet each morning.

The teacher has been passive aggressive, defiant, and downright obstructive over the last two school years. The client is legally named after his father, but he goes by a nickname. The teacher refused to use the client’s nickname, insisting the the client be called and learn to write his much longer legal name. Last year, in first grade, the teacher insisted on trying to toilet train this child, even after the child developed a bladder infection and was under doctor’s orders to cease toilet training for the time being. The teacher required that the child sit on the toilet for approximately 20 minutes at a time three or four times a day. The teacher took it upon himself to bath the child at school, including washing his hair, without informing his mom as to reason(s) why. During an IEP meeting last spring, the teacher protested the limitation of no more than 5 minutes in the bathroom per toileting attempt and that if any body parts other than face and hands needed to be cleaned that the mom be notified by a phone call before any hygiene took place.

Last year, the client’s mom tried to maintain open lines of communication with the teacher, the speech therapist, and the occupational therapist through email. She asked questions like what were they working on for math, reading, and communication so she could work on the same things at home. She asked for work samples and/or homework to be sent home so she could work with her son on the same things. Her email requests were repeatedly ignored. Yet, during parent-teacher conferences, the teacher, the speech therapist, and the principal staged a meeting with this client’s mom outside of the IEP process. They kept her in this meeting for an hour and a half. I was livid for her when she told me what happened. She now knows that if she walks into the same situation again, she should leave and simply say, “I invoke my parental rights. Let’s schedule an IEP meeting.”

The client began to resist going to school, having tantrums in the mornings. When he came home from school, he sought out extensive sensory regulation like squeezes. He began to self-injure by hitting himself in the head with a closed fist. When I added vocabulary to the device to try to help with some of these behaviors, the client would return from school with the vocabulary deleted from the device. Yet, his mom was constantly told that her son did not do anything with and did not use the SGD in the classroom.

Given all of the issues with the classroom and with the classroom teacher, the client’s mom asked to have him placed in a different program even if that meant having him attend a different school. She said she thought the teacher just did not like her son and that he was not learning. She was told there was no other option for placement and that her son would be with this teacher for his second grade year. She was told there were no other options available until her son reached third grade.

Imagine being in her shoes for just a moment. Imagine what it must feel like as a parent to have to send your non-verbal, severely autistic child into this situation. Every school day.

The Recent IEP Meeting or How Not to Shine Your Tushie in Front of Your Admin

The client’s mom called an IEP meeting after being told by one of the classroom aides that her son had “body checked” another student at parent pick up. She was given no other details of the incident, even after asking. The client will “hip check” people he likes as he runs past them as a way to say “hi”. He does it to me. It’s not meant to be aggressive, it’s his version of a “high five.” Is that what happened? Or, did her son aggress against another child? That’s all she wanted to know.

Other items on the agenda included: 1) making sure the client’s nickname was used by everyone to avoid confusion; 2) checking to make sure everyone was clear on the toileting procedures; 3) maintaining open lines of communication open especially following incidents like “body slamming”; 4) making sure that the client had access to the sensory activities that he needed to help regulate himself in the classroom; and 5) trying to get more information about how math and reading were being taught so we could use the same strategies at home.

Seriously. One of the items on the agenda was the name she and her son wanted her son to be called.

That alone should give you an idea of the teacher’s attitude going into this meeting.

In addition to the special education teacher, the mom, and me, there was a program coordinator who had acted as an intermediary with this teacher before, the head of OT for the district, the assigned speech therapist (new this year), and a general education teacher (who was legally required to be in the meeting, but who had never met the client). The special education teacher kept his camera off for the duration of the meeting. He was the only person present to do so. Everyone else either kept their cameras on for the entire 45-minute meeting or turned them on and off as needed. Due to time constraints, the first item up for discussion was making sure the client had access to the deep pressure that he needed throughout the day as well as making sure everyone on the team knew of the client’s need to tap small items against the heel of his palm a couple of times before doing what adults asked of him with them. The head of OT stated that given the client’s ability to ask for what he needed, she would like to make sure that his team was providing the squeezes and deep pressure when the client asked for it rather than scheduling specific times for the input to be provided. I mentioned that I had added an OT folder to the home screen of the SGD app and that the client was able to access the vocabulary in it functionally when needed. I reminded the team that when he was upset, the client may need verbal and gestural reminders to access his device and the folder to let others know what he wanted.

The teacher interjected that the client did not touch the SGD in his classroom. (Remember I mentioned above that the mom tracked the amount of charge on the device every day? We already knew the device wasn’t being used during the school day because the battery charge would only have decreased by a percentage point or two after 6-7 hours – nowhere near enough if it was actually being used in the classroom.)

The administrator stated that the IEP would be changed to reflect that the client would have access to the deep pressure he needed throughout the day when he asked for it and that the client would be directed to ask for what he needed with the SGD when he became upset.

The next item on the agenda was making sure everyone referred to the client by his preferred nickname. The administrator immediately stated that everyone would refer to the client by his nickname from now on, that he would be taught to recognize and write his nickname, and that his preferred nickname would be documented in the IEP. From that point on, everyone referred to the client by his nickname in the meeting – with one notable exception. The teacher refused to call the client by his nickname, instead insisting on using the client’s legal name.

We quickly reviewed that the client was not to remain in the bathroom for more than 5 minutes at a time when being toileted and that he was to wear pull-ups per doctor’s orders rather than underwear for the time being per doctor’s orders. We also reviewed that the classroom staff must call the client’s mom before washing more than the client’s face or hands in the classroom setting.

Ok ~ so far so good with good general agreement from the team members who had their cameras on at least. Remember that the teacher never turned his camera on.

We next turned to talking about specifically what was being taught with regard to math, literacy, and functional academics in general.

Here’s where the teacher got – shall we say – spicy.

Because no work samples or homework came from school, the client’s mom wanted to know what they were working on for functional academics.

I’ll be the first to admit that kids can be very different from one environment to the next. I have no doubt that I’ve seen more of the client’s true abilities than he shows in the classroom. For one thing, I’ve known him longer. For another, my sessions with him are one-on-one. Perhaps most importantly, he always has his device with him when we work together. At home, he is able to count to at least 20 and is able to add to at least 10 with manipulatives. How do I know this? He is able to show me using the on screen number pad on the device. He is able to follow and continue an AB and ABC pattern. He has good print awareness and enjoys books. He uses his finger to follow the text. He is able to point to a word on the page and we are working to recognize sight words. He is able to answer comprehension questions about a text with 66-80% accuracy independently. How do I know this? He really likes Boom Cards and will answer the questions with reading support. He is able to recognize all of the letters of the alphabet by name and about half by sound. How do I know this? We use the on screen keyboard on the device. He will play turn taking games like Candyland, Memory, or modified UNO under duress, but he’ll do it. He really, really likes dinosaurs. I mean REALLLY likes them. Triceratops is his favorite – which he’ll tell you with the SGD when you ask him. He can tell you which ones are carnivores and which ones are herbivores by looking at their mouths and teeth – just like I taught him! And, his mom knows all of this because she’s involved with our sessions.

The client’s mom asked what they were doing in the classroom with regard to functional academics – more specifically what were they doing for math and reading because no work had come home and she wanted to work on the same things at home.

The reply from the teacher -“I work on his IEP goals.”

Great, what are you doing and how are you doing it? How does he show you what he knows?

“I work on his IEP goals.”

What are his IEP goals?

“I work on his IEP goals.”

At this point, the administrator stepped in and briefly summarized the academic IEP goals.

The client’s mom tried to ask again for work samples so she could see what they were working on in the classroom. The teacher responded that he did not have time to do all of this extra work just for her.

Yep – he said that in front of his direct admin.

The client’s mom raised the concern that her son’s IEP goals have not really changed in the last two years. (Again, if you know anything about special education law, you know that this is no longer legal after a 2014 case law ruling [Endrew F.]).

The teacher said to the client’s mom that she could come in and teach his class if she wasn’t happy with her son’s progress.

I asked if the teacher could give us some information about how they were assessing the client’s knowledge in the classroom given that he is non-verbal and an AAC user. I also mentioned how I had been working with the client on being able to answer multiple choice questions by pointing or selecting pictures or icons to help out the classroom staff with assessing his level of mastery of concepts.

The teacher said, and I quote, “If you have such a perfect system, then you come teach him.”

The speech therapist and head of OT visibly gasped on camera when he said that (they were muted). Remember, the special education teacher did not have his camera on during the meeting.

To which I replied that I have my school credential for the state where we are located and would be happy to come to his classroom, observe, and demonstrate what we do at home. Please let me know what I need to do to schedule a visit to the classroom.

Here again, the admin stepped in and took over the remainder of the meeting.

The administrator is a wonderful man who really is working in the best interests of the students and families under his charge. He sent both the client’s mom and me emails after the meeting apologizing for the special education teacher’s behavior.

Unfortunately, the client and his mother are stuck with this special education teacher until the end of the current school year. I can’t imagine how miserable it must be to be a non-verbal second grade child having to go to a class everyday where someone takes your voice away from you. I can’t imaging how miserable it must be to have to go to a class where it feels like the teacher’s issues with the adults are taken out on the child.

As a woman, I also can’t imagine treating a family that way in front of an entire IEP team and continuing to be employed the next day – especially as contract employee like the special education teacher. That’s is 1) a sign of male privilege and 2) sadly, a sign of how desperate the district is to have any teachers at all.

What are your thoughts?

As always, thank you for reading and I look forward to your comments!