Anonymous wrote:A friend whose children are in college now described it to me as a game for some principals.
They want to get rid of SN children so they push and push until your child can't take it anymore and you leave.

Our experience was the opposite. They went out of their way to help.

A friend whose children are in college now described it to me as a game for some principals.
They want to get rid of SN children so they push and push until your child can't take it anymore and you leave.

Anonymous wrote:"Can someone explain the incentives ? In the IEP meeting the one who seemed against an IEP for my child was the principal. She seemed personally irritated by it. In the body language of the teacher I could see she was afraid of saying anything that the principal could interpret as ammunition we parents could use for an IEP. She genuinely seemed scared of saying the truth and was tiptoeing and sharing nervous glances. It was a weird dance to witness. "

The principal could also be kind of paranoid about legal complaints, and may have actually coached the teacher to avoid saying certain things. If so, this would likely be a larger issue at the school, needing to cover up/create fake documentation, etc. In which case it's a school/leadership level issue. My guess is there's a lot nobody knows, maybe past complaints, maybe personal histories, who knows. But, quite unfortunate that a) people feel so defensive/fearful, and b) that kids end up being the ones harmed.

At DC's school the principal had actually been subject to several legal complaints due to IEP compliance so her response to that was just not issuing them. The staff knew it. They were cowards. I'm thinking of one in particular who is a real piece of work. She knew the principal was hurting children and she just let it go. Just a bad person.

Anonymous wrote:
Explanation I was given was : no it is not a budget issue as IEP come with Moco budget not school budget, but principal cares because the IEP tracking takes work so they want to avoid the burden on Special Ed teacher and classroom teacher if not necessary. That’s the explanation I got from the principal (which is a reasonable explanation but didn’t match the level of tension in the room)

More tracking/documentation (which was probably required by IDEA to at least somewhat enforce implementation) means more actual work needs to be documented or bs-documented. So, more work, period. Plus more room for complaints/liability that can't be lied out of. Esp. if staff just doesn't/can't implement. Maybe wouldn't be an issue if folks were better supported/staffed via MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are the “rich” parents in a poor school, maybe the teacher is sick of devoting resources and time to rich kids when the poorer kids need so much more?

OP here, thats a possibility. I would actually have more respect for the principal if that was the reason. That is also why i want to understand if us asking for an IEP deprives other kids. I do think that our kid needs it. It is just that we can afford to pay for outside intervention.

But i am not sure she is helping the poorer kids get the extra support they need either.

I doubt she put that much thinking in to it. Many principals just don't want to bother with special needs kids and think they belong somewhere else, not in their school.

But there is definitely a bias in Moco towards supposed "equity" meaning they deny kids who need special services if they think the families can afford outside help. An evaluator in infants and toddlers told me this very bluntly after we appealed because my very delayed child was denied any services. The supervisor who came in said the first evaluation of my child was not correct in determining no need for services and it was because attitude of some of the staff do not think it is fair to work with children in families that can afford private services. Her evaluation was night and day different and found my child is severely impacted.

It's illegal and not how it's supposed to work but the moral reasons made a lot of sense.

Yes, that is illegal. They can not deny services because of the assumed financial situation of the family involved.

Anonymous wrote:I’ll start by saying that I think all students should get the services they need to succeed in school. That said, I will say there is huge pressure on public schools to provide these services and supports because it is a legal requirement without a lot of real understanding of the cost and resources needed to do so well. This includes testing, staff, supplies, training, etc.

Who are you saying does not understand the cost of the resources? Schools know. They have to do all kinds of planning to come up with numbers.

Anonymous wrote:Principals' supervisors are looking at their IEP data. Maybe he was criticized for over identifying students. It does cost MCPS money. Sometimes they don't want to overidentify students of color, too. In the quest to not "overidentify," wealthy or informed parents often disproportionately get those plans. You have to fight at times for an IEP.

There is no such problem of "overidentifying" students for IEPs. Almost every single school everywhere fights giving them out. It's disgusting.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaintintro.html

omg:

https://schoolkidslawyer.com/2018/01/16/public-schools-have-made-your-child-the-enemy-and-you-the-taxpayer-are-funding-their-battle/

" What school districts and their attorneys don’t want you to know is that because the source of funds paying the lawyer fees is public tax money, they MUST disclose such payments to the public who are paying those taxes.

In other words, if you live in a school district that is waging a special education war against a child with a disability, you have the RIGHT to know how much the school is paying its lawyers.

How do you find this out? You make a Freedom of Information Act or “FOIA” request (or your state’s version of FOIA; for example, in New Jersey it is called the Open Public Records Act or OPRA).

Each state has a website for FOIA requests (I’ve listed a few below as examples) and usually a form to fill out. On the form ask to see “All fees and costs paid to lawyers by XYZ Schooll District for special education disputes or legal disputes under IDEA for the last 5 years” or something similar. Prepare for a fight, but you have the lawful right to that information as long as you live in XYZ School District."

I’ll start by saying that I think all students should get the services they need to succeed in school. That said, I will say there is huge pressure on public schools to provide these services and supports because it is a legal requirement without a lot of real understanding of the cost and resources needed to do so well. This includes testing, staff, supplies, training, etc.

"One has golden diagnosis of asd plus adhd, and the other one has learning
disorder/developmental delays."

What do you mean by golden diagnosis? Does the school or MCPS get more money for that?

My 2 kids have IEP since infant & toddler to pep to public school. We are not rich, but we paid for all private evaluation reports and have kids in weekly therapies since they were as little as 2. One has golden diagnosis of asd plus adhd, and the other one has learning
disorder/developmental delays.

I have good experiences in infant & toddler and pep program. For public school ES IEP, I would say they cannot deny my kid with IEP services but sometimes I feel some frustrations from them ( teachers and IEP). Probably my kids are a bit handful and their work are overloaded, and many time I don't know what's going on with DC at school. My 2 kids were in private daycare, so probably it was private vs public quality thing. Luckily, I don't have to fight for IEP, but the quality of service is hit or miss every year. We rely on weekly private therapies to make up the gap and goal that we want to work on, and sometimes we have private therapists to communicate to IEP to make sure that our goals are on the same pages. We share reports with them.

IEPs cost the school district time and money so they are resented by bad principals and case workers. We had to fight for an IEP for ASD son in FCPS. The Case manager actually showed up unannounced to the school district IEP meeting to fight our DS's hearing. But we had our tutor, tester, and psychiatrist there so won hands down. It's not the way it should be but is in many school districts. That's why you see parents on here hiring advocates or IEP lawyers. If you run into problems, call the district's Compliance Coordinator. It's their job to make sure the schools are in compliance. The local school will sit up and take notice if you call in the Compliance Coordinator - otherwise they may continue to fight accomodations.

"Can someone explain the incentives ? In the IEP meeting the one who seemed against an IEP for my child was the principal. She seemed personally irritated by it. In the body language of the teacher I could see she was afraid of saying anything that the principal could interpret as ammunition we parents could use for an IEP. She genuinely seemed scared of saying the truth and was tiptoeing and sharing nervous glances. It was a weird dance to witness. "

The principal could also be kind of paranoid about legal complaints, and may have actually coached the teacher to avoid saying certain things. If so, this would likely be a larger issue at the school, needing to cover up/create fake documentation, etc. In which case it's a school/leadership level issue. My guess is there's a lot nobody knows, maybe past complaints, maybe personal histories, who knows. But, quite unfortunate that a) people feel so defensive/fearful, and b) that kids end up being the ones harmed.

A direct quote from my child's teacher: "There are SO many kids with accommodations in my class....an IEP makes it a *legal* requirement!"

I think it's the only way there is actual liability for a public school's administration. Federal complaints have to be dealt with.

If the principal were more confident in the capacity of the school/staff, she might feel differently.

This is both a school level issue and an MCPS issue. We were at one school where the special ed staff were truly stellar, ethically beyond competent, and quite skilled. They were supported by an experienced administration, too. Maybe this made up for lack of adequate staffing from MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are the “rich” parents in a poor school, maybe the teacher is sick of devoting resources and time to rich kids when the poorer kids need so much more?

OP here, thats a possibility. I would actually have more respect for the principal if that was the reason. That is also why i want to understand if us asking for an IEP deprives other kids. I do think that our kid needs it. It is just that we can afford to pay for outside intervention.

But i am not sure she is helping the poorer kids get the extra support they need either.

I doubt she put that much thinking in to it. Many principals just don't want to bother with special needs kids and think they belong somewhere else, not in their school.

But there is definitely a bias in Moco towards supposed "equity" meaning they deny kids who need special services if they think the families can afford outside help. An evaluator in infants and toddlers told me this very bluntly after we appealed because my very delayed child was denied any services. The supervisor who came in said the first evaluation of my child was not correct in determining no need for services and it was because attitude of some of the staff do not think it is fair to work with children in families that can afford private services. Her evaluation was night and day different and found my child is severely impacted.

It's illegal and not how it's supposed to work but the moral reasons made a lot of sense.