Confessions/secrets from Sts, OTs, PTs, special ed teachers, administrators, etc

[Anonymous]

Sorry- the 10 hour thing was for DCPS. There are exceptions, of course. And it's not a stated rule. But once you start creeping over 10- SC becomes a harder option to shake off.

SN mom and DCPS Sped inclusion teacher

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Veteran sped teacher here. It is the job of all teachers to constantly review data and discuss student progress. That is how we plan instruction, determine who is meeting/exceeding expectations and who needs more intervention. We have weekly team meetings to discuss instruction and student progress. It is no different when we are assessing students for special education or developing IEPs--we may need to discuss a test result or brainstorm with a fellow IEP team member about a behavior plan--this is what we are supposed to be doing! I always discuss a draft IEP with the student's other service providers...as in, I think he needs goals in these areas, or can you do a pragmatics goal, etc. I also run them by the gen. ed. teacher before sharing them with the parent to make sure they are on target and consistent with what he/she sees in the classroom. The IEP is a draft until it is signed by the parent, and it is our job to make sure we are presenting the best draft to the parents. We are professionals working in a collaborative setting with administrators and general education staff. Would you really have us NEVER discuss students without parents present? That would make it very difficult to do our job. We send our draft goals home to the parents at least 3 days before an IEP meeting so they can review them beforehand, just as the psychologist meets separately with parents at least 3 days before an elig. meeting to discuss the test results. If we meet before the official meeting, we are not plotting or hoarding resources--we are sharing our assessment results, discussing similiarities or interesting findings, considering possible factors in student performance, etc. All of which is intended to improve the outcome for the students, AND make sure the meeting is run in a professional and informed manner.

I'm pretty sure attorneys and physicians discuss cases amongst themselves without clients and/or patients present...again, it is their job to have all the information they need before meeting with their clients and/or patients. Just as it it our job as educators to have all of our data ready. Parent input is a crucial part of the process, just as it is for medical histories, depositions, etc. But you are paying for the expertise of the professionals. We are charged with taking all of our data and developing interventions plans and IEP proposals. The school-based team members should never be officially predetermining a placement or level of service, but they should have a good idea of what they think will work best based on the data they have, and then present that proposal that to the parents. That is the expectation. Would you expect to be included in every consult or records review your doctors engage in about you? Would you be upset to learn that they had reviewed lab results and consulted with colleagues about possible diagnoses without you present?

Parent consent is required for many components of the eligibiity and IEP process, but parent consent is not required (or expected!) for day to day interactions between teachers, or for student specific discussions between the appropriate staff members--I would hope that this would be understood.

This sounds fine! Good! But I have not gotten IEP drafts 3 days ahead. And I did not get a chance to meet with the psychologist 3 days ahead. That's the source of the problem. Yet it's legal in DC, unless this past year's new special Ed law changed that, not sure of new rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My confession is that I rarely see inclusion work in practice. Many classroom teachers don't want us in there, the staffing for in classroom support is too low and the pace of the modern classroom makes it incredibly difficult.

I'm really curious about this, because our issue with the school has been different from most people's. We keep advocating for DS to be in LRE and the school's plan is always to put him in SC classrooms, arguing that he can't keep up otherwise. The kid has A's and B's and passed advanced the SOLs in his mainstream classes and had lower SOL scores (but still passing) in the SC classes. How is that "not keeping up?"

Obviously I don't know the particulars of your child, is behavior a factor in why they want him contained? That's the only reason I have seen academically proficient students put in self contained classrooms.

NP. Our school wanted to give us funding for SN school without going through Due Process bc of behavioral issues. DC is at least two grades above grade level across the board academically but was giving his teachers a really hard time. Once the behavior issues were gone, no more mention of SN placement.

I got the impression that it is probably easier to get funding for SN school due to behavioral issues than it is for academics.

it definitely is if there is a physical manifestation. When you are in a contained program with 10 kids and 3 adults it's much easier to diffuse and restrain if necessary. It becomes much more difficult when there are 25 kids in the class and one adult who is trained to specifically deal with these issues.

[Anonymous]

I think the concern with these pre-meetings is that the IEP team minus the parent is drawing conclusions and making decisions and then "selling" those decisions during the meetings. To suggest anything else is naive at best. Sorry... this is reality for most parents.

It feels like we are not being given the opportunity to weigh in. I understand that the teachers create the draft but, it is very hard for parents to get anything added after you all meet and get on the same page for "professionalism" sake.

At that point, the train has left the station and negotiations are highly tilted in the school's favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My confession is that I rarely see inclusion work in practice. Many classroom teachers don't want us in there, the staffing for in classroom support is too low and the pace of the modern classroom makes it incredibly difficult.

I'm really curious about this, because our issue with the school has been different from most people's. We keep advocating for DS to be in LRE and the school's plan is always to put him in SC classrooms, arguing that he can't keep up otherwise. The kid has A's and B's and passed advanced the SOLs in his mainstream classes and had lower SOL scores (but still passing) in the SC classes. How is that "not keeping up?"

Obviously I don't know the particulars of your child, is behavior a factor in why they want him contained? That's the only reason I have seen academically proficient students put in self contained classrooms.

NP. Our school wanted to give us funding for SN school without going through Due Process bc of behavioral issues. DC is at least two grades above grade level across the board academically but was giving his teachers a really hard time. Once the behavior issues were gone, no more mention of SN placement.

I got the impression that it is probably easier to get funding for SN school due to behavioral issues than it is for academics.

Not true in our case. We desperately seek an ED label so our child can get support, and ultimately private placement, but DCPS claims that being on track academically means the child cannot qualify for an IEP.

Have you toured the private schools that accept ED placements from DCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My confession is that I rarely see inclusion work in practice. Many classroom teachers don't want us in there, the staffing for in classroom support is too low and the pace of the modern classroom makes it incredibly difficult.

I'm really curious about this, because our issue with the school has been different from most people's. We keep advocating for DS to be in LRE and the school's plan is always to put him in SC classrooms, arguing that he can't keep up otherwise. The kid has A's and B's and passed advanced the SOLs in his mainstream classes and had lower SOL scores (but still passing) in the SC classes. How is that "not keeping up?"

Obviously I don't know the particulars of your child, is behavior a factor in why they want him contained? That's the only reason I have seen academically proficient students put in self contained classrooms.

NP. Our school wanted to give us funding for SN school without going through Due Process bc of behavioral issues. DC is at least two grades above grade level across the board academically but was giving his teachers a really hard time. Once the behavior issues were gone, no more mention of SN placement.

I got the impression that it is probably easier to get funding for SN school due to behavioral issues than it is for academics.

it definitely is if there is a physical manifestation. When you are in a contained program with 10 kids and 3 adults it's much easier to diffuse and restrain if necessary. It becomes much more difficult when there are 25 kids in the class and one adult who is trained to specifically deal with these issues.

What I've observed is that behavioral issues will trump a child's academic and social needs every time. Straight ticket to the most restrictive environment regardless of the appropriateness of the class in any other way. Private placement is only easier if the issues are extraordinarily severe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My confession is that I rarely see inclusion work in practice. Many classroom teachers don't want us in there, the staffing for in classroom support is too low and the pace of the modern classroom makes it incredibly difficult.

I'm really curious about this, because our issue with the school has been different from most people's. We keep advocating for DS to be in LRE and the school's plan is always to put him in SC classrooms, arguing that he can't keep up otherwise. The kid has A's and B's and passed advanced the SOLs in his mainstream classes and had lower SOL scores (but still passing) in the SC classes. How is that "not keeping up?"

Obviously I don't know the particulars of your child, is behavior a factor in why they want him contained? That's the only reason I have seen academically proficient students put in self contained classrooms.

NP. Our school wanted to give us funding for SN school without going through Due Process bc of behavioral issues. DC is at least two grades above grade level across the board academically but was giving his teachers a really hard time. Once the behavior issues were gone, no more mention of SN placement.

I got the impression that it is probably easier to get funding for SN school due to behavioral issues than it is for academics.

Not true in our case. We desperately seek an ED label so our child can get support, and ultimately private placement, but DCPS claims that being on track academically means the child cannot qualify for an IEP.

Have you toured the private schools that accept ED placements from DCPS?

NP here. Why would they do this when they apparently don't even have an IEP? They are seeking one if I understand correctly. My kid is at a DC charter. Qualified for IEP as ED and it's been fantastic to be able to have the special Ed support (push in), OT, counseling, FBA etc. Kid is mainstreamed, only pulled out for counseling and OT and doing Great! So I understand why they want an IEP, with whatever label is... Keep at it! They do not have to be behind academically to merit an IEP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My confession is that I rarely see inclusion work in practice. Many classroom teachers don't want us in there, the staffing for in classroom support is too low and the pace of the modern classroom makes it incredibly difficult.

I'm really curious about this, because our issue with the school has been different from most people's. We keep advocating for DS to be in LRE and the school's plan is always to put him in SC classrooms, arguing that he can't keep up otherwise. The kid has A's and B's and passed advanced the SOLs in his mainstream classes and had lower SOL scores (but still passing) in the SC classes. How is that "not keeping up?"

Obviously I don't know the particulars of your child, is behavior a factor in why they want him contained? That's the only reason I have seen academically proficient students put in self contained classrooms.

NP. Our school wanted to give us funding for SN school without going through Due Process bc of behavioral issues. DC is at least two grades above grade level across the board academically but was giving his teachers a really hard time. Once the behavior issues were gone, no more mention of SN placement.

I got the impression that it is probably easier to get funding for SN school due to behavioral issues than it is for academics.

Not true in our case. We desperately seek an ED label so our child can get support, and ultimately private placement, but DCPS claims that being on track academically means the child cannot qualify for an IEP.

Have you toured the private schools that accept ED placements from DCPS?

NP here. Why would they do this when they apparently don't even have an IEP? They are seeking one if I understand correctly. My kid is at a DC charter. Qualified for IEP as ED and it's been fantastic to be able to have the special Ed support (push in), OT, counseling, FBA etc. Kid is mainstreamed, only pulled out for counseling and OT and doing Great! So I understand why they want an IEP, with whatever label is... Keep at it! They do not have to be behind academically to merit an IEP!

m

The poster "ultimately" wants private placement. It will be a good idea to visit the private schools if this is the goal for getting an IEP.


I'm pp whose school wanted to fund for SN school for behavior only. We are also at a charter and it seems "easier" to get SN private placement for behavioral issues at a charter than DCPS. Had the FBA and behavioral plan not worked, DS would be at a SN school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My confession is that I rarely see inclusion work in practice. Many classroom teachers don't want us in there, the staffing for in classroom support is too low and the pace of the modern classroom makes it incredibly difficult.

I'm really curious about this, because our issue with the school has been different from most people's. We keep advocating for DS to be in LRE and the school's plan is always to put him in SC classrooms, arguing that he can't keep up otherwise. The kid has A's and B's and passed advanced the SOLs in his mainstream classes and had lower SOL scores (but still passing) in the SC classes. How is that "not keeping up?"

Obviously I don't know the particulars of your child, is behavior a factor in why they want him contained? That's the only reason I have seen academically proficient students put in self contained classrooms.

NP. Our school wanted to give us funding for SN school without going through Due Process bc of behavioral issues. DC is at least two grades above grade level across the board academically but was giving his teachers a really hard time. Once the behavior issues were gone, no more mention of SN placement.

I got the impression that it is probably easier to get funding for SN school due to behavioral issues than it is for academics.

Not true in our case. We desperately seek an ED label so our child can get support, and ultimately private placement, but DCPS claims that being on track academically means the child cannot qualify for an IEP.

Have you toured the private schools that accept ED placements from DCPS?

NP here. Why would they do this when they apparently don't even have an IEP? They are seeking one if I understand correctly. My kid is at a DC charter. Qualified for IEP as ED and it's been fantastic to be able to have the special Ed support (push in), OT, counseling, FBA etc. Kid is mainstreamed, only pulled out for counseling and OT and doing Great! So I understand why they want an IEP, with whatever label is... Keep at it! They do not have to be behind academically to merit an IEP!

Because the poster stated that their goal is to get private placement. It is smart to go take a look at the private placement schools before planning to attend one as your end game. Most people would only be sending their kids to one of these schools as a last resort. They are very unappealing for a lot of reasons.

[Anonymous]

^^Specifically talking about the schools where a child labeled "ED" would go.

[Anonymous]

I have seen IEP meetings with no pre-meeting--AND "unprofessional disagreement" at the table between staff, but I vastly prefer that to cutting out the parent (illegally, for that matter.) everything doesn't have to be cookie cutter smooth all the time--genuine disagreement is okay and that is the point of a discussion, as long as it stays civil.

[Anonymous]

Sped teacher with DCPS. We have to get all reports out 10 days in advance. The municipal regs changed from 7 days to 10 days. It is also the law to get things in advance. We have weekly team meetings to discuss students and to brainstorm ideas. We have premeetings too but cant render an eligibility decision it breaks the law. My gripe is my administration and DCPS. They say they want to keep kids in neighborhood schools but don't give us the finds or staff. I can't tell you how many times I have fought for a dedicated aide in order to keep a kid in my school and have a person from downtown show up at the meeting and say no and we don't get the aide because it's not unanimous. We then have to find a different placement. I go home crying it happens so much.

[Anonymous]

DCPS does not do dedicated aides. You will lose every time. It sucks.