A state administrative law judge has ruled that a student with cerebral palsy who investigators say was abused by hisHopewellMiddle Schoolteacher was denied a “free and appropriate public education” by Fulton County Schools.
Click here to continue reading story.
I am excited to announce a new project my wife Michele Branch, MFT, and I have started to help address school bullying. “How to Bully Proof your Child” is now on Facebook. We would really appreciate anyone who wants to stand against school bullying going to our page and liking it. On the site we will keep people informed on current bullying issues, help educate parents as to what they can do to combat school bullying, and provide a forum for like-minded people who want to see bullying eradicated. If you want to join our cause, click here.
I will be appearing Sunday at 5:00 to discuss bullying and special education children. The show can also be listened to after the fact. Check out the show at www.thehappyhourgals.com.
As followers of my blog know, I have always had an interest in bullying law and protecting our children from bullying. Over the course of writing about school bullying, I have too often had to write about teen suicides for which the victims claimed that the cause was incessant bullying at school. All these stories are tragic enough to break anyone’s heart. Here though, is another tragic aspect to the costs of bullying for our society. Read the story of what bullying can do here.
If you are seeking out this information, your child is likely in trouble with his school district. Additionally, your child is in special education, because this issue deals with children under the umbrella of special education. A manifestation determination meeting is very serious because it means that the school district is attempting to change your child’s placement or place your child on a lengthy suspension .
What is an manifestation determination? If a school district wishes to force a change of placement or suspend a child for an amount greater than 10 days, it must conduct a manifestation determination. The term itself means that the district must decide (determination) if the conduct which was the reason for the sought after discipline was a result (manifestation) of the child’s disability. If it was not, then the suspension/change of placement may proceed. If it was, then it may not. The reason for this is simple. If the behavior was caused by the child’s disability, i.e. impassivity, then the child was really not in control of their actions and the discipline would be unwarranted.
What is the process? A manifestation determination looks like an IEP team meeting, although there will likely be more school district personnel in attendance.
How will the decision be made? The district will investigate the incident itself. In order to do this, it will look at evidence, talk to witnesses, interview any victims, talk to the administrators and school personnel who have knowledge of the incident and its surrounding circumstances. Second, the district will review relevant information regarding the child and his disability already known to the district. In other words, they will review the student’s educational records, including the child’s cumulative file, their special education documentation, any information from Student Study Team meetings and the like. Once this step is completed, the IEP team must then make its determination.
What questions are asked to determine if the behavior is a result (manifestation) of the child’s disability?There are two questions that must be answered.
(I) if the conduct in question was caused by, or had a direct and substantial relationship to, the child’s disability; or
(II) if the conduct in question was the direct result of the local educational agency’s failure to implement the IEP.
If the local educational agency, the parent, and relevant members of the IEP Team determine that either subclause (I) or (II) is applicable for the child, the conduct shall be determined to be a manifestation of the child’s disability.
(F) Determination that behavior was a manifestation.–If the local educational agency, the parent, and relevant members of the IEP Team make the determination that the conduct was a manifestation of the child’s disability, the IEP Team shall–
(i) conduct a functional behavioral assessment, and implement a behavioral intervention plan for such child, provided that the local educational agency had not conducted such assessment prior to such determination before the behavior that resulted in a change in placement;
(ii) in the situation where a behavioral intervention plan has been developed, review the behavioral intervention plan if the child already has such a behavioral intervention plan, and modify it, as necessary, to address the behavior; and
(iii) except where there are special applicable circumstances, return the child to the placement from which the child was removed, unless the parent and the local educational agency agree to a change of placement as part of the modification of the behavioral intervention plan.
Are only special education children subject to manifest determination requirements? No, in limited circumstances, children not in special education may also be protected. If the district has knowledge that the child has a disability, then a manifestation determination is necessary before a lengthy suspension or change of school placement.
When does a school district have knowledge that a non-special education student is disabled? A district is attributed such knowledge under three circumstances: 1) when a parent has in writing expressed to the district that the child needs services; 2) when a parent has made a written request for special education testing for the child to the district; and 3) when school personnel have expressed specific concerns about a problematic behaviors directly to the director of special education for a district or supervisory personnel.
If your child has an upcoming manifestation determination meeting, it would be wise to consult with an attorney in order to protect your child’s rights. You may contact The Law Office of Gregory R. Branch at its website, by email, gregorybranch@edrightsadvocate.com, or by phone at (714) 856-1166.
In Lodi, California, a middle school vice principal arrested a teacher for misdemeanor battery. Such an arrest is unorthodox and could lead her into direct conflict with the California Teachers’ Association. Read the details of the story here
Hello,
I will be appearing on the internet radio show “Happy hour with Anxiety Gal and Holly to discuss the legal implications of the Penn State/Sandusky horror. My segment will be from 5:30-6:00 PM, Pacific Time on Sunday, December 18. Please click here at that time to listen to the show.
On December 2, 2011, the United States Department of Education (USDE) issued new and revised Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) regulations. The changes come in response to requests by educational institutions to be able to using testing data to assess their programs without running afoul of FERPA regulations
.
Along with the regulations, the USDE has issued both parent and school district guides to the new regulations.
Directory information: In the past, parents had the right to opt their children out of school directory information. By not giving directory permission, schools were not allowed to included children in yearbooks and other type publications. Under the new regs, schools can not adopt limited director information policies and implementation methods. The intent is to open up for school uses which are considered non-dangerous, such as yearbooks, but still giving parents the right to restrict publication for uses which are more potentially dangerous. Keep in mind, these regulations do not require district to lighten their restrictions; they only give them the opportunity to do so should they wish to do so.
Testing information: Essentially, the new regulations allow district and state agencies to look at longitudinal data regarding testing data. The new regulations seek to help facilitate effective research and evaluation of federal and state supported education programs through the use of such data systems.
For more information about FERPA, click here. In order to access the final regulations, click here.
Gregory Branch is an educational attorney and teacher. His solo practice focuses on educational issues. He is also the Santa Ana Special Education reporter for Examiner.com. You can see his Examiner articles here.
Thanks to Jim Gerl at the Special Education Law Blog for bringing these regs to my attention.
School districts should expect even more litigation in coming years as more students are diagnosed with autism. A just released comprehensive study by Perry A. Zirkel, Ph.D., J.D., L.L.M., shows that parents of autistic children are ten times more likely to bring suit against their home school district than are parents of children with other IDEA recognized disabilities.
Check out the rest of my Examiner.com article here.
Judge Posner
“Modern American kids, it seems to me, have excessive self-esteem,” said Judge Richard A. Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, inChicago. “They’re spoiled and coddled. Many of them have very aggressive parents.”
The judge, a conservative nominee of President Ronald Reagan who is considered one of the leading intellectuals of the federal appeals courts, spoke Nov. 11 in Chicagobefore the national conference of the Education Law Association. That group is made up of professors who teach education law, as well as practicing lawyers and school administrators.
See the remainder of Mark Walsh’s excellent article at the following link…
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/school_law/2011/11/judge_posner_on_school_law_and.html