disappointed with IEP

[Anonymous]

Hi - My son who is high functioning ASD goes to Farmland Elementary School in N. Bethesda. He has an IEP. We are having a really hard time with the school. from the start, they are trying to get out of giving any help and making us feel like crap in the process. The SLP is not only unhelpful but is aggressively rude towards us. For example, she accused my husband and I of trying to misuse public funds since we are asking school for help. She made other unnecessary remarks of that nature before. The special teacher was very helpful either. although she spent more time with DS than any of the private therapists, she lagged behind them in terms of working on goals.

This past year I took my son to a lot of private therapies and worked with him myself at home on academic and social things. He made tremendous progress thanks to many therapy hours and great private providers. Now, the school is saying that he is great and does not need any help. In reality though he still has a lot of issues especially in the social arena. Since we are working with Weinfield Group on the IEP, they are not eliminating the IEP but making in bare bones. My son does have the usual social issues that kids with ASD has. These can be corrected through ABA but of course the school does not allow ABAs into the classroom. At this point I am willing to pay myself for ABA consultants to help my DS's progress. This poor experience with Farmland Elementary really made me wonder if we should be spending our energy on this public school. Should we just try to find a private school and arrange ABA therapy there?

I would greatly appreciate any input I could get on deciding between staying at Farmland or going private

[ Edited by Admin to remove an individual's name. ]

[Anonymous]

First, I'm sorry. I've been in this position too. It is so frustrating. I feel like our kids with "mild" ASDs are caught in a catch 22. Schools put interventions in place. The child does well with intervention. Then, the school takes away interventions because the child is doing well. BUT... the child does well WITH the intervention, not without it.

My child had to completely hit bottom in terms of acting out and work refusal before MCPS brought in instructional specialists and the Autism Unit. We are still in this process. It has sucked for our family and my child. It has been devastating for DC's self-esteem and ability to feel comfortable and like school.

[Anonymous]

They just might not have the resources and they're pushing back and being incredibly difficult. Been there (another Bethesda ES). Private school might be a better option. In my experience, an advocate moves things forward in ways a parent can't and helps navigate this incredibly awful time, especially when you see the school isn't acting as an ally. You'll get DC what they need.

[Anonymous]

The question seems to be what you can afford, and how much hassle you want to endure.

A couple thoughts:

Private school isn't cheap, and not all will allow an ABA on site or in the classroom. Figure out if that's a realistic option and when you'd be able to enroll. You may need to wait until fall 2018, in which case you need to figure out how to get through SY 17-18.

When you add the cost of tuition plus the ABA fees, does it make sense to consider a special needs private school where some of the ABA techniques may be integrated into the classroom already?

You're in a real catch-22. You know your kid needs services but you're not willing to let them go without while school isn't on board -- so you pay out of pocket. And then it makes it even harder for the school to see the need for them.

Good luck with your decision -- it does sound as if your child is doing well, which is the most important thing.

[Anonymous]

I really understand your frustration. The school personnel may feel frustrated as well. The SLP is given guidelines to follow by the county to identify students who should receive service at taxpayer expense. Students who have a disability (rather than disorder) that has an educational impact and that requires the specialized skill of the SLP (and no one else can reasonable do it) qualify. There has to be a cut off somewhere. I am an SLP and my own daughter did not qualify for speech services in the county despite falling at the first percentile on a standardized articulation measure. I see both sides. Also, in terms of social skills, that typically gets shifted to counseling because the SLP is limited to dealing with pragmatic language, but not social skills. I hear you, but I also understand the other side (why do there have to be sides?). I am very sorry to hear that you feel you were spoken to with disrespect. That is a shame.

[Anonymous]

My kids are at the Bethesda Elementary School, I've spent years in IEP meetings and in and around classrooms, volunteering. When my son's speech services were reduced, it didn't mean he was on target for speech. It meant he had progressed so much that resources had to be conserved for others, and I saw this at school - it wasn't a lie, or a pretext, or anything bad.

Now I don't know how things are managed at your school, and school staff should never be rude to you - that is grounds for a complaint to the principal. But it could be that your child has progressed beyond a certain threshold. What do you think? Is it worth hiring a special education consultant? I would go that route first before paying $40K+ a year for private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi - My son who is high functioning ASD goes to Farmland Elementary School in N. Bethesda. He has an IEP. We are having a really hard time with the school. from the start, they are trying to get out of giving any help and making us feel like crap in the process. The SLP is not only unhelpful but is aggressively rude towards us. For example, she accused my husband and I of trying to misuse public funds since we are asking school for help. She made other unnecessary remarks of that nature before. The special teacher was very helpful either. although she spent more time with DS than any of the private therapists, she lagged behind them in terms of working on goals.

This past year I took my son to a lot of private therapies and worked with him myself at home on academic and social things. He made tremendous progress thanks to many therapy hours and great private providers. Now, the school is saying that he is great and does not need any help. In reality though he still has a lot of issues especially in the social arena. Since we are working with Weinfield Group on the IEP, they are not eliminating the IEP but making in bare bones. My son does have the usual social issues that kids with ASD has. These can be corrected through ABA but of course the school does not allow ABAs into the classroom. At this point I am willing to pay myself for ABA consultants to help my DS's progress. This poor experience with Farmland Elementary really made me wonder if we should be spending our energy on this public school. Should we just try to find a private school and arrange ABA therapy there?

I would greatly appreciate any input I could get on deciding between staying at Farmland or going private

[ Edited by Admin to remove an individual's name. ]

In general, I see parents lament that all the time, even with NT kids.

The social aspect isn't something schools are really that good at helping with so you have to step in and do more at home on that front.

[Anonymous]

There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

But that's the thing. It's not the school's job to mitigate all of the impact and catch the child up to the level of a neurotypical peer. The government has decided that taxpayer-funded school services are for children who are generally in the area of the lowest ~7th percentile. If a child is above this level but not where the parent wishes them to be, it's on them to supplement with private services. There just isn't money for everyone, so the government sets the limits that the school has to then enforce. It's not personal. Nothing in government ever is.

The people who it is personal for, the family, have to do what they think their child needs. That's how it's always been. They just can't rely on government-funded services if they don't meet the requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

But that's the thing. It's not the school's job to mitigate all of the impact and catch the child up to the level of a neurotypical peer. The government has decided that taxpayer-funded school services are for children who are generally in the area of the lowest ~7th percentile. If a child is above this level but not where the parent wishes them to be, it's on them to supplement with private services. There just isn't money for everyone, so the government sets the limits that the school has to then enforce. It's not personal. Nothing in government ever is.

The people who it is personal for, the family, have to do what they think their child needs. That's how it's always been. They just can't rely on government-funded services if they don't meet the requirements.

And what law makes this so? Please cite. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

But that's the thing. It's not the school's job to mitigate all of the impact and catch the child up to the level of a neurotypical peer. The government has decided that taxpayer-funded school services are for children who are generally in the area of the lowest ~7th percentile. If a child is above this level but not where the parent wishes them to be, it's on them to supplement with private services. There just isn't money for everyone, so the government sets the limits that the school has to then enforce. It's not personal. Nothing in government ever is.

The people who it is personal for, the family, have to do what they think their child needs. That's how it's always been. They just can't rely on government-funded services if they don't meet the requirements.

Where did you get that social skills services are only for the lowest functioning kids and specifically for kids below the 7th percentile? That has not been our experience at a DCPS, where child with ASD who is totally mainstreamed and not below 7th percentile gets social skills pull outs from counselor and pragmatics from SLP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

But that's the thing. It's not the school's job to mitigate all of the impact and catch the child up to the level of a neurotypical peer. The government has decided that taxpayer-funded school services are for children who are generally in the area of the lowest ~7th percentile. If a child is above this level but not where the parent wishes them to be, it's on them to supplement with private services. There just isn't money for everyone, so the government sets the limits that the school has to then enforce. It's not personal. Nothing in government ever is.

The people who it is personal for, the family, have to do what they think their child needs. That's how it's always been. They just can't rely on government-funded services if they don't meet the requirements.

I've never seen this percentage cited anywhere, but don't disagree that it could be the case. What are you basing this on PP? And what 'government' are you referring to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really understand your frustration. The school personnel may feel frustrated as well. The SLP is given guidelines to follow by the county to identify students who should receive service at taxpayer expense. Students who have a disability (rather than disorder) that has an educational impact and that requires the specialized skill of the SLP (and no one else can reasonable do it) qualify. There has to be a cut off somewhere. I am an SLP and my own daughter did not qualify for speech services in the county despite falling at the first percentile on a standardized articulation measure. I see both sides. Also, in terms of social skills, that typically gets shifted to counseling because the SLP is limited to dealing with pragmatic language, but not social skills. I hear you, but I also understand the other side (why do there have to be sides?). I am very sorry to hear that you feel you were spoken to with disrespect. That is a shame.

I've heard this quoted at IEP meetings for my child. He was diagnosed privately with a Specific Learning Disability in Reading but because the Reading Specialist couldn't get services for her child, my child by all means didn't qualify for services. Not exactly a legal argument but MCPS employees are great for discriminating against kids because of their own biases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

But that's the thing. It's not the school's job to mitigate all of the impact and catch the child up to the level of a neurotypical peer. The government has decided that taxpayer-funded school services are for children who are generally in the area of the lowest ~7th percentile. If a child is above this level but not where the parent wishes them to be, it's on them to supplement with private services. There just isn't money for everyone, so the government sets the limits that the school has to then enforce. It's not personal. Nothing in government ever is.

The people who it is personal for, the family, have to do what they think their child needs. That's how it's always been. They just can't rely on government-funded services if they don't meet the requirements.

I've never seen this percentage cited anywhere, but don't disagree that it could be the case. What are you basing this on PP? And what 'government' are you referring to?

I've also never seen a percentage quoted in the law but our school said below 25% was necessary to qualify. The truth is that a variety of data should be used to evaluate kids and no one test or measurement should be used. Using a 7% standard would be in violation of the IDEA and ADA laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between an NT child who may have some social awkwardness and an ASD child who can't function with the social aspects of the school day including small group work, negotiating hallways, cafeterias, greeting teachers and classmates, playing in groups with other children at recess.

It is up to the IEP team to determine the extent of the challenge and to work toward mitigating the impact in a school setting. This is absolutely the school's job under IDEA. Please don't put this all on the parent. It sounds like OP is doing all s/he can.

But that's the thing. It's not the school's job to mitigate all of the impact and catch the child up to the level of a neurotypical peer. The government has decided that taxpayer-funded school services are for children who are generally in the area of the lowest ~7th percentile. If a child is above this level but not where the parent wishes them to be, it's on them to supplement with private services. There just isn't money for everyone, so the government sets the limits that the school has to then enforce. It's not personal. Nothing in government ever is.

The people who it is personal for, the family, have to do what they think their child needs. That's how it's always been. They just can't rely on government-funded services if they don't meet the requirements.

I've never seen this percentage cited anywhere, but don't disagree that it could be the case. What are you basing this on PP? And what 'government' are you referring to?

I'm basing it on working local school systems. I was being general with government-funds come from both state and federal areas and are limited in nature (because taxpayers obviously have a variety of needs where they want their money distributed, such as roads, fire/EMS, other public services...), which requires limiting services to those who truly need it. 7th percentile is 1.5 standard deviations below the mean, which is a common cutoff in this area. Some districts use 2 standard deviations, which is the 3rd percentile. Very few use 1 below the mean (~16th percentile). It's just a numbers game. Just like how you can make too much money to qualify for scholarships/grants/housing assistance, etc, but not make enough money to be able to comfortably do the things you want to do. It's not personal, and it's really, really hard to be in that in-between area.

The disclaimer here is that school teams have some discretion and obviously no two children are the same, as are no two teachers and school situations. No test score is sacred and I'm speaking in generalities, but what the SLP was reported as saying, while inappropriate and not tactful, makes me think that this is the situation for this child. Doing generally well and able to access the curriculum in the school, but not at the level of his NT peers where his parents would obviously like him to be.