Lies my IEP Team Told Me- let’s compile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is true that we are not allowed to name a specific program in the IEP goals because if you were to move or transfer to another school that didn’t offer Wilson or OG they would be unable to comply with the IEP. Instead, we will put in the notes that “student benefits from a multi sensory intensive phonics pattern instruction such one based on Orton Gillingham”. And in the present levels we will put that student is receiving and benefitting from “specific program”. However this can’t be part of the goal or indicated in the service hours.

It’s the same as when we say a student’s reading level will improve from X level to Y level we have to indicate “or equivalent” because schools all over use many different text leveling benchmark systems.
It’s not a lie.

The 'not allowed' is not true. There is no legal barrier to adding the name of the program. You can note the program & then say 'or to be re-evaluated based on a change in the school or school system.'

Special ed teachers are told lots of lies of what they are allowed or not allowed to do. Just because it was in your training, doesn't mean it's 'true.'

Training is a big issue. We were dissatisfied with our first IEP, so we called Central. They came to the next meeting and actually gave the special idea teacher training right there in the meeting (as in, "No. you have to write the goals like this...). It still didn't work, so we got an advocate. The advocate got us a placement that the special ed teacher had never heard of and wrote the IEP for the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no such thing as co-taught honors classes, you can either have sped support or honors classes.

Teachers don’t have to be trained I. The program to administer it with Fidelity- they can just read the teacher guide.

There is no such thing as certification in teaching OG programs.

Teachers can’t say the word dyslexia in parent teacher conferences, it is illegal.


To be fair- I think some of the people saying these things believed them. But the mysterious district policy trainings seem to be the source.

Some of these seem like just a miscommunication. At the schools where I’ve taught there are no cotaught honors sections because there isn’t the enrollment to justify it. If 10 kids needed cotaught honors algebra then sure it could be created, but for 1-3 kids they can’t use the staffing for it. FAPE doesn’t require honors cotaught, just an “appropriate” course. Some schools don’t offer honors at all in certain subjects, others it’s only honors. It just depends on the demands.

For the last one, teachers aren’t allowed to diagnose or suggest. If your child has dyslexia then I will happily talk to you about it, but if it hasn’t been diagnosed all I can share is factual observations of what I’m seeing. We can then test reading and comprehension ability, but I will never say I think a kid might have xyz in any meeting.

This is true. For the same reason, teachers cannot tell a parent "I think your kid has ADHD" because they aren't qualified to make a diagnosis.

Teachers can’t diagnose, that is correct. But is is absolutely NOT ILLEGAL for them to suggest that a child be screened for a learning disability such as dyslexia based on their observations. More than 1 teacher has told me that suggesting screening is illegal, when in fact Child Find is required by law. If there are concerns, a child should be screened.

I am not sure if they are hearing this in teacher college or from their admins. But it needs to be fixed. K and 1st grade teachers are on the frontlines for identifying kids with learning challenges.

In fact, the law requires schools to locate and identify children for special education. It's called the Child Find requirement.

I'm a teacher.

The law requires teachers and other school staff to notice when a student's performance indicates that they may be eligible for special education. At the initial meeting the law requires me to present data on the patterns I see. But it's absolutely not either required, or best practice, for me to speculate about the specific disability category. I don't say "I think this child has a learning disability". That's not my place. I say "I notice that her math, and her understanding of science and social studies concepts are much stronger than her reading and writing. I also notice that when we do activities that involve blending and segmenting sounds she struggles. Here are some assessment data, and some work samples that I think illustrate that pattern." Being an observant teacher, with many years of experience, I can guess that that kid is more likely to come back as SLD than as deafblind, for example, but it's not my place to make that comment. And I have absolutely seen kids referred to testing by teachers who have speculated to me that a kid has A, but they really have B. That's why we have testing. Kids with SLDs, and kids with inattentive ADHD, or vision issues, or receptive language issues, or mild hearing loss can be hard to differentiate. If that wasn't true we wouldn't do testing.

As to the term "dyslexia", the obligation of the child find team is to figure out which of the listed disability categories a student falls into. One of the categories is "specific learning disability", and most but not all kids with dyslexia will qualify under that category. I can write the term "dyslexia" into the notes, or the present level of performance, but most teachers will keep it consistent and use the term specific learning disability in the area of reading. Since the terms are synonyms, parents who over focus on this are out of line.

What about when we are told the school can't diagnose dyslexia as a reason to not even evaluate? I don't care what it's called, but why can't they test for it?

Strangely we really can’t diagnose dyslexia. DCPS has some supports for it but they call it ‘specific learning disability’ As a teacher I find this very odd but there’s a long and frankly political reasons for this.

No longer true (and wasn't actually 'true' but what most people followed). DC has a new law & DCPS has issued new dyslexia guides - thank you to Decoding Dyslexia & others.

It's the case teachers aren't trained to 'diagnose' learning disabilities - but they are trained to look out for issues & issues with test scores they are supposed to all be getting training about how to understand flags for dyslexia that have been missed by out of date (by decades) understanding of how it works (ie. don't look at composite reading ability but by different areas etc). Every kid in DC is now supposed to be screened.
Then the trained specialists are supposed to do a next level evaluation with a dyslexia screening. And then they know what to do about dyslexia support, but again haven't been doing for decades - but they claim they will now, with trained specialists giving the supports.

It doesn't necessarily matter if you kid is diagnosed as 'dyslexic' or 'specific learning disability' (where dyslexia is one specific learning disability) -- but how are these kids getting identified and the services they need.

DCPS did recent town halls & if you have any issues you, they claimed with smiles that you can contact the heads of the program at DCPS: [e-mail] or [e-mail]

As someone whose been in the 'specific learning disability' trap without adequate services for years now - I'd say bug them every day until they do what they are supposed to....

My fav 'lie' in an IEP was 'your DS is so bright he just skips ahead on things'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no such thing as co-taught honors classes, you can either have sped support or honors classes.

Teachers don’t have to be trained I. The program to administer it with Fidelity- they can just read the teacher guide.

There is no such thing as certification in teaching OG programs.

Teachers can’t say the word dyslexia in parent teacher conferences, it is illegal.


To be fair- I think some of the people saying these things believed them. But the mysterious district policy trainings seem to be the source.

Some of these seem like just a miscommunication. At the schools where I’ve taught there are no cotaught honors sections because there isn’t the enrollment to justify it. If 10 kids needed cotaught honors algebra then sure it could be created, but for 1-3 kids they can’t use the staffing for it. FAPE doesn’t require honors cotaught, just an “appropriate” course. Some schools don’t offer honors at all in certain subjects, others it’s only honors. It just depends on the demands.

For the last one, teachers aren’t allowed to diagnose or suggest. If your child has dyslexia then I will happily talk to you about it, but if it hasn’t been diagnosed all I can share is factual observations of what I’m seeing. We can then test reading and comprehension ability, but I will never say I think a kid might have xyz in any meeting.

This is true. For the same reason, teachers cannot tell a parent "I think your kid has ADHD" because they aren't qualified to make a diagnosis.

Teachers can’t diagnose, that is correct. But is is absolutely NOT ILLEGAL for them to suggest that a child be screened for a learning disability such as dyslexia based on their observations. More than 1 teacher has told me that suggesting screening is illegal, when in fact Child Find is required by law. If there are concerns, a child should be screened.

I am not sure if they are hearing this in teacher college or from their admins. But it needs to be fixed. K and 1st grade teachers are on the frontlines for identifying kids with learning challenges.

In fact, the law requires schools to locate and identify children for special education. It's called the Child Find requirement.

I'm a teacher.

The law requires teachers and other school staff to notice when a student's performance indicates that they may be eligible for special education. At the initial meeting the law requires me to present data on the patterns I see. But it's absolutely not either required, or best practice, for me to speculate about the specific disability category. I don't say "I think this child has a learning disability". That's not my place. I say "I notice that her math, and her understanding of science and social studies concepts are much stronger than her reading and writing. I also notice that when we do activities that involve blending and segmenting sounds she struggles. Here are some assessment data, and some work samples that I think illustrate that pattern." Being an observant teacher, with many years of experience, I can guess that that kid is more likely to come back as SLD than as deafblind, for example, but it's not my place to make that comment. And I have absolutely seen kids referred to testing by teachers who have speculated to me that a kid has A, but they really have B. That's why we have testing. Kids with SLDs, and kids with inattentive ADHD, or vision issues, or receptive language issues, or mild hearing loss can be hard to differentiate. If that wasn't true we wouldn't do testing.

As to the term "dyslexia", the obligation of the child find team is to figure out which of the listed disability categories a student falls into. One of the categories is "specific learning disability", and most but not all kids with dyslexia will qualify under that category. I can write the term "dyslexia" into the notes, or the present level of performance, but most teachers will keep it consistent and use the term specific learning disability in the area of reading. Since the terms are synonyms, parents who over focus on this are out of line.

What about when we are told the school can't diagnose dyslexia as a reason to not even evaluate? I don't care what it's called, but why can't they test for it?

Strangely we really can’t diagnose dyslexia. DCPS has some supports for it but they call it ‘specific learning disability’ As a teacher I find this very odd but there’s a long and frankly political reasons for this.

No longer true (and wasn't actually 'true' but what most people followed). DC has a new law & DCPS has issued new dyslexia guides - thank you to Decoding Dyslexia & others.

It's the case teachers aren't trained to 'diagnose' learning disabilities - but they are trained to look out for issues & issues with test scores they are supposed to all be getting training about how to understand flags for dyslexia that have been missed by out of date (by decades) understanding of how it works (ie. don't look at composite reading ability but by different areas etc). Every kid in DC is now supposed to be screened.
Then the trained specialists are supposed to do a next level evaluation with a dyslexia screening. And then they know what to do about dyslexia support, but again haven't been doing for decades - but they claim they will now, with trained specialists giving the supports.

It doesn't necessarily matter if you kid is diagnosed as 'dyslexic' or 'specific learning disability' (where dyslexia is one specific learning disability) -- but how are these kids getting identified and the services they need.

DCPS did recent town halls & if you have any issues you, they claimed with smiles that you can contact the heads of the program at DCPS: [e-mail] or [e-mail]

As someone whose been in the 'specific learning disability' trap without adequate services for years now - I'd say bug them every day until they do what they are supposed to....

My fav 'lie' in an IEP was 'your DS is so bright he just skips ahead on things'

I got, "I've noticed your son is a jock, most jocks don't like to read. Maybe that's the problem"
The reading specialist said, I heard the jock comment, I just want you to know I don't hold the same opinion. It's still the only time I have cried in public is after the IEP meeting, after she said that to me.


I got, "If your son practiced reading as much as he practices sports he would read more fluently"

He did get a D1 scholarship to a top university and NO his SAT score would not have gotten him there. Yes, he had to backdoor into the college education he wanted.

[Anonymous]

Bethesda elementary
North Bethesda middle (out of cluster program)
Walter Johnson high (out of cluster program)

Folks, this is likely an MCPS Employee -- toured these schools last year. I am calling out an MCPS troll here with this comment. This cluster is no better (and could be worse) than smaller clusters. (Poolesville) There is a move to keeping LD kids in their 'home school' for services and these schools above were historically an LD 'magnet'. This is silly now as there is no school -- and likely will not BE school for this year due to union strength. May I never hear them talk about 'equity' again though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bethesda elementary
North Bethesda middle (out of cluster program)
Walter Johnson high (out of cluster program)

Folks, this is likely an MCPS Employee -- toured these schools last year. I am calling out an MCPS troll here with this comment. This cluster is no better (and could be worse) than smaller clusters. (Poolesville) There is a move to keeping LD kids in their 'home school' for services and these schools above were historically an LD 'magnet'. This is silly now as there is no school -- and likely will not BE school for this year due to union strength. May I never hear them talk about 'equity' again though.

Oh nonsense. We go to different schools in MCPS. I only recall one lie and it wasn't SN related. I came down on them like a ton of bricks and resolved it.

It hasn't all been perfect. They make mistakes. I pushed back on those too. We don't get everything we want. That's life.

[Anonymous]

"Dyslexia cannot be diagnosed before 3rd grade." This from the mouth of a Terrel H. Bell Awarded-principal at a DCPS Nat'l Blue Ribbon School.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We were obviously so lucky; I had no idea. We got an IEP for speech articulation therapy when the initial screen didn’t quite suggest it (around the 20-25th%ile), but the evaluator added some observations about comprehensibility going down during connected spontaneous speech (true), to get us over the line. It was so helpful. (Our kid tested 90%ileish on vocabulary and we are UMC — no insurance coverage though and multiple small kids, so private speech would have been doable but require sacrifices — so we weren’t a particularly sympathetic case. I just assumes all the Early Stages people were out to help families. Anyway, these stories are horrible and I’m so sorry.

Which district?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bethesda elementary
North Bethesda middle (out of cluster program)
Walter Johnson high (out of cluster program)

Folks, this is likely an MCPS Employee -- toured these schools last year. I am calling out an MCPS troll here with this comment. This cluster is no better (and could be worse) than smaller clusters. (Poolesville) There is a move to keeping LD kids in their 'home school' for services and these schools above were historically an LD 'magnet'. This is silly now as there is no school -- and likely will not BE school for this year due to union strength. May I never hear them talk about 'equity' again though.

Oh nonsense. We go to different schools in MCPS. I only recall one lie and it wasn't SN related. I came down on them like a ton of bricks and resolved it.

It hasn't all been perfect. They make mistakes. I pushed back on those too. We don't get everything we want. That's life.

Oh nonsense yourself. You give yourself away with the teacher like take down. The lie MCPS told us? Lie of omission: never using the word dyslexia, only decoding problem.

[Anonymous]

Teacher trolls, go put up your bulletin boards and leave us alone!

[Anonymous]

That my child was making progress.

That virtual learning would work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teacher trolls, go put up your bulletin boards and leave us alone!

I can't imagine why some of you have adversarial relationships with school staff