Think twice before hiring an advocate…

[Anonymous]

Parents should really organize around this. These are simple fixes that could be passed at the state level and make the lives of so many kids and teachers better

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP I totally get it and have been there. It's unbelievably stressful when you are subpoenaed over a student you've never met and have to spend multiple hours of your school day in IEP meetings being bullied by advocates and lawyers with tape recorders while you should be working with your actual students. Mind you that you then have to find time to makeup the service hours you missed while you sat in these awful meetings. Again for a student you've never met. It's an awful. Happened years ago and it's still painful to think about. These things really happen and the school provides very little support to the teachers/ staff when it does.

I’m a school psychologist who posted earlier on this thread. I had one meeting which caused me to call out sick the next day and contemplate quitting. I was accused of fabricating my results and “never actually meeting the child”. This was so patently untrue that it didn’t upset me. But later, the advocate turned to the parent after I fumbled over my words after being asked the same question ten ways and said “and THIS is why you got an outside evaluation”. They also mentioned that the child couldn’t have possibly opened up to me because “I have an unfriendly face”. It really, really hurt me. I have my PhD and could easily work outside of the school setting. But I chose to work in our school system because I really believed in it. I’m back at it and not letting advocates rattle me as much- but it was truly offensive and unprofessional. I also changed schools where admin would have my back more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I totally get it and have been there. It's unbelievably stressful when you are subpoenaed over a student you've never met and have to spend multiple hours of your school day in IEP meetings being bullied by advocates and lawyers with tape recorders while you should be working with your actual students. Mind you that you then have to find time to makeup the service hours you missed while you sat in these awful meetings. Again for a student you've never met. It's an awful. Happened years ago and it's still painful to think about. These things really happen and the school provides very little support to the teachers/ staff when it does.

I’m a school psychologist who posted earlier on this thread. I had one meeting which caused me to call out sick the next day and contemplate quitting. I was accused of fabricating my results and “never actually meeting the child”. This was so patently untrue that it didn’t upset me. But later, the advocate turned to the parent after I fumbled over my words after being asked the same question ten ways and said “and THIS is why you got an outside evaluation”. They also mentioned that the child couldn’t have possibly opened up to me because “I have an unfriendly face”. It really, really hurt me. I have my PhD and could easily work outside of the school setting. But I chose to work in our school system because I really believed in it. I’m back at it and not letting advocates rattle me as much- but it was truly offensive and unprofessional. I also changed schools where admin would have my back more.

I can appreciate and sympathize with your feelings - I suspect most parents can since we have frequently discussed how we have to take the entire day off work when there's an IEP meeting because we're too wrung out from regulating our emotions in our personal life to attend to our professional responsibilities. Have you not seen the posts about how wretched we feel when we're unable to contain our tears at IEP meetings?

I'm the PP who said I am what FCPS has wrought. My youngest is now a senior in HS. When they were in ES, I had to file 2 state complaints and a civil rights complaint to get the 2 of my kids with IEPs appropriate support/services. Looking back, I did exactly what I needed to do. I was right. FCPS was wrong and had I allowed them to do what they proposed, my kids with IEPs would not have graduated with standard diplomas. My older DC would not have been able to choose to go to college. My younger DC with an IEP would have been in a low functioning classroom when he's capable of at least "average" achievement.

I recognize that my DCs are not as needy as some, are minorities and consume scarce resources. Your frustration should be directed at the school system and federal government for not providing sufficient resources not parents doing their best for their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this doesn't sound nice, but the purpose of special education is to help students with disabilities access the general education curriculum. It isn't to help children reach their highest potential. That sounds rough, but it is the legal truth. It would be great if schools could individually help each child reach their potential, but that isn't special education. A child with a disability who is performing at or near grade level is accessing the curriculum (assuming we're focused on academics in this example, not other areas of need). It is okay (and good!) to want more for your kid if you think they can achieve more than grade-level. But look somewhere other than special ed.

This is reaching qanon levels of misinformation. The Endrew F case set precedent that every child should have the chance to meet objectives that reasonably challenge them, not de minimus progress.

PP here. I may not have been clear - I was talking about what it takes to qualify for special education. Which is a disability that impedes access to the general education curriculum, and requires SDIs to access the curriculum. Endrew F has nothing to do with special education eligibility; it is only relevant once a student qualifies for an IEP. Once a child qualifies - yes! The school must set goals and provide SDIs to reach ambitious goals. This does not apply to students with disabilities who do not qualify for special education. A student with mild ADHD or dyslexia served under a 504 plan? Endrew F does not apply.

Dear teacher - you do not understand special education law. "Impedes access to the general education curriculum" is not a component of the IDEA law. Rather, a student must have 1) a qualifying disorder that 2) adversely impacts education and 3) necessitates special instruction.

A child can "access the curriculum" but still not be able to learn from it adequately commensurate with their ability. This happens in the case of dyslexia for example - dyslexic typically can "access" the general ed curriculum in the sense that they can use books, see print, hear the teacher, etc. They also tend to learn something about reading, just nothing compared to their peers. They progress at a slower rate and their reading is often laborious. Indeed, they may be the kind of student you are referring to who is "almost" reading at average grade level, and so appears to you not to need special education, especially compared to other "more needy" students you identify. They appear to be "accessing" instruction, but since the test is actually whether their disorder "adversely impacts" their "education" and "necessitates special instruction", they qualify for IEPs where their assessed ability (IQ) is significantly above their ability to read (as measured by achievement). These students benefit from special instruction in reading appropriate to dyslexics (OG and other instruction that focuses on the sound symbol relationship).

Students with "mild dyslexia" should never be served under a 504 plan instead of an IEP, otherwise they miss the chance for special instruction that they need to have a chance at becoming fluent readers near their level of ability. It would never be appropriate to substitute a 504 plan with an "accommodation" like audiobooks or more time or text to speech instead of OG reading instruction.

FWIW, IDEA is very clear that a student can have good grades and be on grade level and still need an IEP as my 2E DS had for dysgraphia and "mild" ADHD. (Although as parents we did not think it so mild - it required medication and a lot of other support.) These kids are also eligible to take magnet and advanced classes, with IEP supports as necessary.

If you were parroting this misinformation at my child's special education meeting, I would file some kind of complaint and make sure that I brought an advocate or lawyer to my meetings with you.

You seem to have forgotten Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. My child with learning disabilities is not just entitled to access to the general ed curricula, he is entitled to participate in any school activity that receives federal funding - including advanced academic instruction available to the general student population if he is capable, with specialized instruction, of accessing that curricula.This is not a curricula that allows him to learn to his potential but access to what is offered to non-disabled students.

"No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance . . . ."

This (the part about needing specialized instruction to be in an advanced class) is not at all true. Section 504 is about inclusion/exclusion and accommodations - it does not include specialized instruction.

[Anonymous]

22:06, I am so sorry that happened to you.

OP, I can understand how frustrated you are having your caseload increase and having your colleague quit.

I am hiring an advocate for the first time after switching schools. In my last IEP renewal, I was incredibly frustrated, as the team analyzed an outside psych ed and rejected everything it said. The services were decent there, and my child made a year's worth of progress in a year, but it was still demoralizing. I am hiring an advocate this time because the new school was not able to hire a special ed teacher with reading expertise for my child's grade, and so my child is not getting the services they need.

PP who talked about bias, I can totally believe it. Some of my foster child's goals were SO LOW at first, I couldn't believe it. Like read 10 cvc words at 80% accuracy. (At end of second grade) That said, all of my kid's teachers wanted them to succeed, and did their best.

PP who talked about MCPS not preparing teachers to have dyslexic students -- I am not in MCPS, but I cosign this sentiment!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We did not hire an advocate and the school screwed my child.
I only found out from talking to neighbors the gap in services that my child was getting vs similar profile student who parent's went to the meeting with an advocate.
My child had 60 minutes of reading intervention a week and was 2 years behind grade level. Same school - same grade - class mate 1 year behind and was getting 150 minutes a week. When I had tried to make a case that I thought more was needed they told me it was the most they could provide.

Parents bring advocates because they have heard these stories. There is no trust in the process because the schools have not delivered FAPE. I could see on the teachers faces and in their body language that they wanted to say more - but they would not cross the school director of special education.

Why can't you do the extra reading intervention for your child? I know that question is forbidden here, but seriously, an extra 90 minutes a week I'd just do it myself and not bother with the hassle of working the school system.

I am not qualified to deliver OG training.
and why should my neighbor's kid in the same school get the extra 90 minutes a week because they had an advocate go to their IEP meeting and we be expected to pay an outside tutor for this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these parents seem to want teachers to quit and then what? Probably sue the school districts even though it’s not their fault. The fault lies with a federal law that isn’t accompanied by money. There is no way for districts to meet what parents demand these days; the system is irrevocable broken.

OP here. I think my real point got lost in my lab frustration yesterday. But this is the real truth- all students will now be getting a lot less without these two teachers, and it’s not that easy to replace them (we already have one gen ed vacancy that we have been completely unable to fill). If you want us to leave and find a job where we are respected, then fine. We might. I am just so sick of being painted like the enemy when all I want is to help kids achieve.

Nobody wants teachers to quit. We do want you to follow the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:22:06, I am so sorry that happened to you.

OP, I can understand how frustrated you are having your caseload increase and having your colleague quit.

I am hiring an advocate for the first time after switching schools. In my last IEP renewal, I was incredibly frustrated, as the team analyzed an outside psych ed and rejected everything it said. The services were decent there, and my child made a year's worth of progress in a year, but it was still demoralizing. I am hiring an advocate this time because the new school was not able to hire a special ed teacher with reading expertise for my child's grade, and so my child is not getting the services they need.

PP who talked about bias, I can totally believe it. Some of my foster child's goals were SO LOW at first, I couldn't believe it. Like read 10 cvc words at 80% accuracy. (At end of second grade) That said, all of my kid's teachers wanted them to succeed, and did their best.

PP who talked about MCPS not preparing teachers to have dyslexic students -- I am not in MCPS, but I cosign this sentiment!

Ugh, I hate crappy goals - TBH reading 80% of the words on a page is non-functional. I was always fighting with my IEP team to change these kinds of terrible goals. I would usually get the increased goal - but in the end it didn't make a difference because the IEP team never actually collected data on these goals. In MCPS, the "data" is a standardized teacher report form that does not match the objectives and goals. (And the IEP team was not actually providing specialized instruction to meet the goals. )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these parents seem to want teachers to quit and then what? Probably sue the school districts even though it’s not their fault. The fault lies with a federal law that isn’t accompanied by money. There is no way for districts to meet what parents demand these days; the system is irrevocable broken.

OP here. I think my real point got lost in my lab frustration yesterday. But this is the real truth- all students will now be getting a lot less without these two teachers, and it’s not that easy to replace them (we already have one gen ed vacancy that we have been completely unable to fill). If you want us to leave and find a job where we are respected, then fine. We might. I am just so sick of being painted like the enemy when all I want is to help kids achieve.

Nobody wants teachers to quit. We do want you to follow the law.

+1. You say you want to help kids achieve, but when you refuse to follow the law you are NOT helping kids achieve. When you say some special ed kids are more deserving than other special ed kids and therefore the less deserving special ed kids shouldn't get what they are legally entitled to, you are NOT helping kids.

I will have respect for teachers and admin who follow the law. If you don't follow the law - is it really that surprising that you are not professionally respected?

And, BTW, I have never been lied to and disrespected by people as I have been lied to and disrespected by teachers and administrators as the parent of a special needs student. The last 10 years have been truly unbelievable in that respect. I have a zillion crazy stories to tell in that vein. I went in with a very cooperative stance initially, but from the very first meeting, the school was dishonest with me. Trust is often granted initially as a courtesy, but by the time the school system misrepresents or is out of compliance for the 3rd, 4th, 5th time.... well, trust is earned. When school professionals fail repeatedly to meet their legal duty, it is unsurprising that they lose parents' trust.

[Anonymous]

Instead of blaming parents who are advocating for EXACTLY what the school system promises, maybe you should turn your ire toward the system that underfunds and then undercuts students to meet the shortfall. Or just admit you don’t want FAPE for SN students. I used to be a pro-public school advocate until trying to get accommodations for my child’s SN. I learned very quickly that the district just wanted us to shut up and go away. The parents/advocates didn’t cause this. If the school met its obligations there would be far less need for advocates.

[Anonymous]

The last two posters + 100.

From another SN parent that has been through it for the past 9 years

I’m not saying as a teacher you don’t have a reason to be frustrated but it’s not SN children, parents and advocates that are causing the issues. My child has a right to an education, not to just be housed for the day in a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these parents seem to want teachers to quit and then what? Probably sue the school districts even though it’s not their fault. The fault lies with a federal law that isn’t accompanied by money. There is no way for districts to meet what parents demand these days; the system is irrevocable broken.

OP here. I think my real point got lost in my lab frustration yesterday. But this is the real truth- all students will now be getting a lot less without these two teachers, and it’s not that easy to replace them (we already have one gen ed vacancy that we have been completely unable to fill). If you want us to leave and find a job where we are respected, then fine. We might. I am just so sick of being painted like the enemy when all I want is to help kids achieve.

Nobody wants teachers to quit. We do want you to follow the law.

Don't take it out on the teachers. Take it out on the system that doesn't provide anywhere close to the resources needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a disgusting post OP. come on.

+1

We hired an advocate and an attorney after our kid was sent to the office every day by his teacher because "he was smart and should know better" while ignoring that he had autism and other recognized disabilities. School admin. delayed a fall request for an evaluation for an IEP until the spring. Finally had our FIRST meeting in March, then #2 in June.

Every story is different OP. No one, but us (and those we hired) was looking out for our child. Certainly not at his school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All these parents seem to want teachers to quit and then what? Probably sue the school districts even though it’s not their fault. The fault lies with a federal law that isn’t accompanied by money. There is no way for districts to meet what parents demand these days; the system is irrevocable broken.

OP here. I think my real point got lost in my lab frustration yesterday. But this is the real truth- all students will now be getting a lot less without these two teachers, and it’s not that easy to replace them (we already have one gen ed vacancy that we have been completely unable to fill). If you want us to leave and find a job where we are respected, then fine. We might. I am just so sick of being painted like the enemy when all I want is to help kids achieve.

Nobody wants teachers to quit. We do want you to follow the law.

Don't take it out on the teachers. Take it out on the system that doesn't provide anywhere close to the resources needed.

The only way to take it “ out on the system” is to pursue a child’s legal right to an education and file an ocr complaint or due process when those rights are infringed upon. Most parents don’t have that knowledge, but guess who does, advocates and attorneys. No one wants an adversarial relationship with a school/ principal/ teacher but when your child is denied an appropriate education bc they have a disability, parents are going to have feelings about that.

[Anonymous]

“Appropriate education” is too broad and is what is driving me out of special education.