An IEP Is A Contract – Read It

Image courtesy of Mohamed_hassan on Pixabay.com

Current Events

Like most entries I post here, this one is based on actual events.

A family has been receiving reports from one of my clients’ teachers about behavioral challenges in the classroom. These behaviors range from not following directions, to throwing rocks during PE, to touching other students, to fighting with his “frienemy”, to acting out more when there’s a sub, etc.

The parents have received notifications from the regular classroom teacher, the substitutes, and the principal. One incident of touching another student is being investigated because the client reportedly left bruises on the other student’s skin.

My client is 6 years old. He has a severe mixed receptive-expressive language disorder. His language skills are like those of a 3-4 year old (and so is his general behavior). So, when the reported incident of aggression happened, the other student was able to provide an explanation of what happened. My client wasn’t. Guess which student was blamed for the incident?

The Backstory

There is a backstory to this episode, of course.

My client finally received an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) in December, 2022. Finally. It took nearly a year of trying and a behavioral incident involving the same behaviors I described above to get the local school district to evaluate this child.

This particular client is adopted by older, first time parents. They love their son deeply and are having to learn as they go – just like all first time parents. They adopted a baby who was born at approximately 36 weeks gestation with a mix of drugs and alcohol in his system at birth, requiring a month-long stay in the NICU to detoxify his system. This child received early intervention services until the age of 3 years which also just happened to be the onset of the pandemic.

Like far too many children with special needs in my community, the local school district ‘lost track’ of him after he aged out of early intervention. This issue predates the pandemic by at least a decade, despite what the school district claims.

In late Spring 2022 and as the client was getting ready to turn 5 years old, the family requested an evaluation through the Child Find mechanism. At the evaluation, the parents were told the evaluators did not typically see children like their son. They told the family they usually worked with children who were much more “severe.” Despite performing below the 7th percentile in three areas evaluated, the Child Find evaluators concluded the child was not eligible for special education services upon kindergarten entry.

My client attended a private preK program for the spring and summer. His behavior devolved over time despite what the teachers tried because the other kids were giving him attention when he engaged in attention seeking behaviors. For this particular child, there is no such thing as positive attention or negative attention. There is only attention or no attention.

So, this child entered kindergarten without the benefit of an IEP. He also was enrolled at a magnet program.

I tried my best to talk his mother out of the magnet program. I explained that it was just a matter of time before the same behaviors the preK program had been dealing with emerged in the kindergarten classroom. I explained that his traditional, neighborhood elementary school would have more resources for dealing with his behavior. I had finally convinced her to withdraw him from the magnet program and enroll him in the neighborhood school.

Then, she went to talk with the magnet program. The principal and assigned classroom teacher assured her that they would be able to manage her son’s behavior. The teacher went so far as to tell his mother that she was the best possible classroom teacher for her son. (I bet you can see where this is headed, huh?)

School started the beginning of August as it always does here. With my encouragement, my client’s mother submitted a written request for a special education evaluation to the principal on the first day of school. We knew what was going to happen; it was just a matter of time.

Under federal special education law, the district has 15 calendar days to respond to a parent’s request for an evaluation. The magnet program took all 15 days to decline the parental request. They cited the IEP evaluation from the Child Find team 4 months previously, despite the fact that the child’s behavior was already escalating in the classroom. His behavior had escalated to the point where his mom had been called to come get him twice and yet the request for the IEP evaluation was denied.

Exactly one week after the district denied the parents’ request for an evaluation there was an incident that the school could no longer ignore. It involved the child’s need for attention from other children and it happened in the boys’ bathroom. He was 5 years old at the time, but school district policy dictated that he be suspended for unwanted advances. He was suspended for one day.

The parents requested a meeting with the principal and teacher for the following day. The parents, principal, classroom teacher, and school psychologist had a lengthy meeting and the parents described their son’s birth history and history of these behaviors in the preschool placements he had been in. They requested an evaluation for an IEP again. This time it was granted.

The local education agency (LEA; generally a school district) has 60 calendar days to complete the evaluation process then hold a meeting to discuss the findings with the parents. As a team, the child’s eligibility for special education services and under which of the 13 federally recognized disability categories is determined. For children under the age of 6 years, it is possible to be eligible for special education services under an umbrella category of “Developmental Delay.” In many districts, the initial IEP meeting is held at the same time as the determination of eligibility meeting. But, not where I live.

Unbeknownst to me, the IEP team at the magnet program had contacted my client’s mother during the evaluation period to ask if they could expand the eligibility categories under consideration to include autism spectrum disorder.

Once the evaluation was completed, the meeting was scheduled and the family asked me to attend. At least it was an MDT (multidisciplinary team) meeting, so there was only one report.

But, no where in this report was there any mention of the child’s birth history. Remember, the child had a significant history of being born at approximately 36 weeks gestation with a mix of drugs and alcohol in his system. He was in the NICU for the first month of his life while he detoxed. There would never have been no mention of his personal developmental history if I had not requested that the MDT amend their report to include it. It was immediately obvious to me that the MDT had already decided that this child was on the autism spectrum even though their “evaluation” consisted of conflicting reports completed by the classroom teacher and the parents. The GARS or the CARS was not administered, nor was the ADOS-2. The MDT stated that they would find the child eligible for special education services under the category of autism.

This was understandably a major blow to the parents who were not prepared to hear this. They immediately protested and were told they could request an independent education evaluation (which they have done and which was granted by the director of psychological services precisely because the MDT did not consider the child’s exposure to drugs and alcohol prenatally). I suggested that the team consider finding the child eligible for an IEP under the category of developmental delay (he was 5 at the time). The MDT stated that they had decided he was either going to be eligible for an IEP under the category of ASD or they would recommend that he not be found eligible for special education services. Seriously.

It’s probably a good thing the initial IEP meeting was scheduled for a later time. Emotions were running pretty hot by the end of the meeting.

The initial IEP meeting itself went smoothly. A different facilitator was present for this meeting who kept things moving along. She also was willing to listen to parents and me, which was very helpful. While the family was not happy with the outcome of the MDT meeting, the initial IEP that was developed was a solid plan.

Because of some other incidents that happened between the child and teacher at the magnet program, the mother decided to withdraw her son from the magnet program and enroll him at his neighborhood elementary school. As just one example, the teacher was requiring the child to wear a name tag around his neck all day when this was not required of the other students. The child was eloping from the classroom at this point which was the teacher’s justification for singling him out. While it’s understandable, that doesn’t make it right.

The child finished his kindergarten year at his neighborhood school with an amazing teacher who was able to fully support him in the classroom. I’m so glad that he and his parents had that experience.

This School Year

This school year is a different story. The child is placed with a first grade teacher who is overwhelmed by him, his behavior, and his need for supports.

I will be the first to defend general education teachers. They did not ask to be special education teachers. That’s not where their strengths lie. When children like my client are placed in their classrooms, they will likely need extra support. They will need to recognize that they may need to change what they are doing and provide more differentiated instruction. They need to make sure they know what is in the child’s IEP and how to implement it. They might need help from their admin or the IEP team to make sure they’ve got the support they need in the classroom.

Because the IEP is a contract. It’s not just a packet of papers that comes with the child from one classroom to another. It’s a legal, binding contract between the school district and the family that those supports, accommodations, modifications, and placement options are what the team considers best for that particular student. The supports, modifications, accommodations, and goals listed in the IEP are not optional.

In my client’s case, some of his modifications are: 1) preferential seating near adults; 2) ignore minor challenging behavior; 3) visual schedule available to him at all times; 4) listening checks to include having him repeat instructions back to the adults; and 5) requiring completion of 1/2 of assigned tasks in class with any remaining work to be completed in his resource program. He has a lot of accommodations and modifications to help him stay in the general education classroom.

His behavior started to escalate about a month into school this year. Right around the time the review from kindergarten ended and new work was being introduced. I want to acknowledge that the PE teacher has been really, really wonderful about implementing the strategies we suggested at the IEP meeting. She has found a rhythm that works for the child in her classes. The music and art teachers have begun making sure they use visual supports and listening checks with him, too. The librarian uses the accommodations and modifications listed in the IEP and has been able to work through the behavioral issues that were coming up in such a large space. The resource teacher has always had fewer issues because she works with him in a smaller space in smaller groups.

That leaves the classroom teacher. The child has figured out the classroom teacher and he is relentless. He is not able to keep pace with the work in the classroom, so he acts out to get attention. It started with chewing through pencils. It’s escalated to running around or out of the classroom, randomly yelling out, throwing other students’ water bottles in the trash, drumming on his or others’ desks, getting on the teacher’s laptop during lessons, and telling the teacher “no” loudly at every opportunity. The reward system in the class means nothing to him. Abstract points on a parent communication system are too distant from the immediate attention he gets in the classroom from his peers and the teacher. Taking recess away just means he gets one on one adult attention which is what he wants.

The teacher texts his mom every time the child engages in a behavior. It’s gotten to the point that the mom mutes the conversations during the day because there is nothing she can do while he’s at school and she has to work, too. There is no point in trying to talk to her son when he comes home because whatever happened is all in the past.

The teacher does not seem to understand that a visual schedule for this child is not the same as the schedule she writes on the board for everyone else. She does not seem to understand what listening checks are. She does not ignore minor challenging behavior in the classroom. She does not seem to understand that her responses to his behavior are exactly what he is looking for. Recently, on one particularly trying day the mom replied back to the string of texts that teacher may want to review the supports, modifications, and accommodations in the IEP and consult with the IEP team about the strategies that are effective for other teachers. A day later, the teacher replied that, “the IEP is reviewed daily, including the supports and modifications,” and that, “the IEP team is consulted every day.”

The use of the passive verb voice in the teacher’s reply was tell tale.

A couple of days later, the resource teacher told my client’s mom that the classroom teacher had requested an evaluation by the Student Support Team (SST) given her son’s behavior in the classroom. Initially, the mom was livid about it.

My take is this: good. Maybe the teacher will listen to the SST’s recommendations. Maybe the SST will have some other supports that can be incorporated into the IEP. Because this won’t be the last time the child will have a teacher who does not know and/or is not willing to listen regarding the best way(s) to support him in the classroom.

We’re waiting for the results from the SST and the child’s annual IEP meeting is next week.

For the child’s benefit, I’ve also started talking to the parents about considering requesting either more time in resource for their son or asking about options for placement in a mild-moderate learning disabilities classroom. It’s clear that he is not able to keep pace in a full-day general education placement and that’s not fair to him.

As always, thanks for reading!