Requirements:
1. Using your understanding of IDEA, critically analyze the follow
Requirements:
1. Using your understanding of IDEA, critically analyze the following Case Studies.
2. Following each case, there is one question. Answer each question in approximately 100-150 words explaining the reasoning for your answer. Support responses with readings.
Case One
A 6-year-old transferred to another district in her state. She had an IEP in effect from a prior school, which included speech-language therapy. Promptly upon her enrollment in December 2008, her new district began providing the therapy, although not the amount listed in the IEP.
In May 2009, the new district adopted and implemented a revised IEP. Although the child’s parent had agreed to the initial provision of special education and services in the prior district, she alleged that she did not consent to the new IEP. The parent further alleged that the district denied the child FAPE from the date of enrollment through the end of the 2009 school year.
Case 1 Question: Did the district violate the IDEA as alleged by the parent? Explain your reasoning. Use readings to support your answer.
Case Two
A California district held two IEP meetings in which the parent of a six-year-old with autism and the other necessary team members engaged in robust conversations regarding the child’s programming and placement. At the end of the second meeting, the district was ready to present its offer of FAPE. Some required team members had already left, albeit without the parent’s written consent. Nevertheless, the special-education director orally presented the district’s offer to the parent. Each individual who attended the IEP meetings, other than the parent, later testified that they believe the proposed IEP was appropriate.
The parent filed a due process complaint alleging that the district violated the IDEA procedurally because the director was the only staff member who contributed to and made the offer.
(Note: A mandatory IEP team member may be excused from an IEP meeting involving a modification to or discussion of the member’s area of the curriculum or related services if the parent and district consent in writing and the member submits input prior to the meeting.
Case 2 Question: Does the absence of required IEP team participants render the district’s offer procedurally defective? Explain your answer. Use readings to support your answer.
Case Three
A parent asked her daughter’s Connecticut district to evaluate the teen for special education on October 28, 2017 because she was failing most of her classes after being retained in eighth grade for a second year. Less than a month later, the district’s screening indicated that the student needed vision correction. The district told the parent that it could not begin an evaluation until she provided a vision report or glasses. The district provided parent with a gift certificate for an eye exam.
Four months later (February 2018), the district suspended the screening process due to lack of a vision report. In June 2018, the parent alleged the district failed to evaluate the student in a timely fashion. The district asserted that the parent did not provide the vision report until May 2018. At which time, they told the parent that they would need a hearing report in addition to the vision report. The parent claimed that she provided the vision report earlier. In any case, the district stated that it would not reconvene until after summer holidays and any delay was as a result of the parent not completing the vision and hearing screening.
Case 3 Question: Did the Connecticut district violate the IDEA by not evaluating the child? Explain your answer. Use readings to support your answer.
Case Four
A sixth-grader who was medically diagnosed with ADHD had difficulties with impulsivity and significant anxiety. The student’s teachers stated that his attention getting-behaviors, extreme defensiveness, and hyperactivity often angered and annoyed classmates and interfered with his learning. His behavior also made him a target for bullies.
The student and his parents frequently reported bullying incidents to the school. They complained that classmates were posting insults about the student on Facebook. The student was also allegedly pushed into lockers and spat on. As a result, the sixth-grader was afraid to go to school. However, there was also evidence that the student sometimes misconstrued normal peer interactions as bullying. His difficulties continued, despite his participation in a social-skills class that was open to all students and the advice he received from his guidance counselor.
The Planning and Placement Team (PPT) evaluated the student and found him ineligible under the IDEA as a student with ADHD or ED. The PPT concluded that the student’s condition did not impact him academically and there is no reason to believe the child has a disability that requires services. The parent alleged that the district violated the IDEA’s child-find provision.
Case 4 Question: Did the district violate IDEA’s child-find provision? Explain your answer. Use readings to support your answer.
Case Five
Despite reports that a child with autism had tantrums and regressed academically in his general-education kindergarten class, the father of the six-year-old California boy rejected a proposal to place him in a small special-education class for first grade.
According to the child’s kindergarten teachers, the student showed no interest in interacting with peers and was unable to grasp what was being taught to the other students. His tantrums lasted from two to forty minutes, sometimes with crying, several times per day. They occurred whenever his one-to-one aide presented him non-preferred tasks, such as an academic or social activity.
The father stated that the boy interacted well with his family and behaved in community settings. He pointed to his good behavior in a small preschool class and in a swim class consisting of his son and another child. The father filed a due-process complaint alleging that the district’s proposed placement violated LRE.
(Note: Under the IDEA’s LRE requirement, districts may educate students in special classes or separate schools only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in general-education classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.)
Case 5 Question: Does the LRE obligate the district to place the six-year-old in a general-education class? Explain your answer. Use readings to support your answer.