Showing posts with label special education. Show all posts

Trainings of Dispute Resolution Professionals

The Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden in Stockholm is the highest administrative court in Sweden. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I love my job. Because of it, I frequently get to speak at conferences and do trainings. Special education law is a great field because it is constantly changing. As we have said here before special ed law is a lot closer to metaphysics than it is to contract law.

I really enjoyed a training that I did last week. It was for a state education agency and their administrative law judges,mediators and complaint investigators. I'm doing another ALJ training next week. (In some states, we are called hearing officers. In others we are called ALJs.) Although I am referred to as the "trainer," I always learn something from the participants. The participants often are active during the session- asking questions and offering solutions that work for them. Last week was no exception.

When I work with my fellow hearing officers, I am always impressed by the quality of their work and their dedication to their craft. It is rewarding.

There have been many suggestions that the special education due process hearing system be gutted, or substantially changed. What do you think?

Harkin Amendment Would Blunt Sequester Cuts to Special Ed

Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Senator Tom Harkin has introduced an amendment to HR 933 that would mitigate the effects of the sequester in special education. Here is a summary of the amendment.

If you are concerned about the sequester and its effect upon the education of children with disabilities, you should contact your Senators and representatives and ask them to vote for the amendment. Our friends at the Council for Exceptional Children have established this tool to make it very easy to effectively contact your senators about this issue. You should personalize your message to reflect your feelings.

So what do you think about this Amendment?

Sequestration Will Hurt Kids With Disabilities

English: View of Capitol Hill from the U.S. Supreme Court Česky: Pohled na Kapitol z budovy Nejvyššího soudu Spojených států (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sequestration starts today unless the Congress acts. It will hurt the education of children with disabilities!

How will IDEA be affected? Under sequestration, federal funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act will be reduced by $1,053,600,000 in 2013, or 28 percent of the total reduction to education programs.

You can view an analysis and explanation by our friends at IDEA money watch here.

You can see the amount of money that your state and the projected number of special ed staff will lose on this chart.

Now would be a good time to call your congressmen and senators and tell them to fix this.

Breaking: New 20 Year Study on Effects of Bullying

English: Image for mental health stubs, uses two psych images - psychiatry (medicine) and psychology (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Bullying of children with disabilities continues to be the hot button issue in special education law. The Special Education Law Blog has previously run an in depth series of posts on bullying of children with disabilities. Here is the index to that series.

Recent news concerning the effects of bullying on children in general provides more insight into the harmful effects of this nasty phenomenon. The effects may be worse than previously suspected.

In breaking news, a study was released last week that followed children who were bullied or were bullies or both for a period of twenty years. The study by William E. Copeland, PhD; Dieter Wolke, PhD; Adrian Angold, MRCPsych; E. Jane Costello, PhD was published in the JAMA Psychiatry Journal and can be reviewed here. A summary by DukeHealth.org can be read here.

The study found that bullied children grow into adults who are at increased risk of developing anxiety disorders, depression and suicidal thoughts. Those who were both bullies and victims had higher levels of all anxiety and depressive disorders, plus the highest levels of suicidal thoughts, depressive disorders, generalized anxiety and panic disorder. Bullies were also at increased risk for antisocial personality disorder.

What are your thoughts?

Special Education Law 101 - Index to Series

Index to Special Education 101 Series

Special needs education transport services in ...

Image via Wikipedia

A reader once suggested that I provide an index wen I run a series. I agreed that this is an excellent idea, and I try to add one at the end of our series. Here is the index for the Special Education Law 101 series which recently concluded. Clicking on the name of a particular post in the series will bring you to the actual post.

Here goes :

Part I Sources of Law September 10, 2012

Part II FAPE September 18, 2012

Part III FAPE continued September 26, 2012

Part IV Least Restrictive Environment October 3, 2012

Part V Identification and Eligibility October 10, 2012

Part VI IEP Issues October 20, 2012

Part VII Related Services October 26, 2012

Part VIII Transition November 2, 2012

Part IX Discipline November 16, 2012

Part X Unilateral Placements November 6, 2012

Part XI Compensatory Education December 6, 2012

Part XII Stay Put December 12, 2012

Part XIII Legal Representation January 14, 2013

Part XIV Expenses and Attorney's Fees January 25, 2013

Part XV Burden of Persuasion February 1, 2013

Part XVI: Hearing Procedures I February 6, 2013

Part XVII Hearing Procedures II February 13, 2013

We hope that you enjoyed the series!

Special Education Law 101 - Part XVII Hearing Procedures

English: Device for entering judgments at a group decision making session using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is the final post in a series of posts comprising an introduction to special education law. This series is meant to be an introduction for newbies and a refresher course for more experienced readers.

Today's post concerns some additional unusual procedural issues in due process hearings:

Resolution Session

IDEA provides provides that where a parent requests a due process hearing, the school district must convene a resolution session within 15 days of receipt. The school district may not bring their lawyer unless the parent does so. An agreement resulting from a resolution session is legally binding and enforceable in court, but either party may void such an agreement within 3 business days. The federal regulations provide that if a parent does not participate in the resolution session the district may request that the HO dismiss the complaint.

IDEA, § 615 (f)(1)(B); 34 C.F.R. § 300.510.

Evidence

IDEA, § 615(h)(2); 34 C.F.R. § 300.512(a)(2

Representation

IDEA, § 615(h)(1); 34 C.F.R. § 300.512(a)(1).

Other procedures

IDEA, § 615(h)(3); 34 C.F.R. § 300.512(a)(4)&(5) and 300.512(c)(1)-(3).

45 day Rule/ Deadline for Decision

The hearing officer’s decision is due within 45 days after the conclusion of the 30 day resolution period, subject to various possible adjustments and extensions if granted by the hearing officer.

34 C.F.R. § 300.511(e) and (f).

Acronyms & Special Education - An Ethical Issue? - Postscript

English: A special education teacher assists one of her students. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A few weeks back we ran a post about the overuse of acronyms in special education. There has been a lot of interesting feedback.

The post was inspired by a footnote written by a Judge in a special education case. He said in K.O. v. New York City Department of Education 60 IDELR 102, n.1 (SDNY 01/26/2012): " Unfortunately, '[t]his opinion, dealing as it does with the IDEA and practices thereunder, is replete with acronyms.' M.H. v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ. (M.H. II), 685 F.3d 217, 223 n.l (2d Cir. 2012). One suspects that regulators and bureaucrats love such jargon because it makes even simple matters cognizable only to the cognoscenti and thus enhances their power at the expense of people who only know English. Nevertheless, acronyms have so invaded IDEA practice that this judge, like others before him, is pretty much stuck with having to use them."

You can see the entire post here.

The responses generally agree that we overuse acronyms. Where the disagreement occurs is the question of whether this is an ethical issue. I'd be interested in your thoughts. This issue may have some traction!

Special Education Law 101 - Part XVI: Hearing Procedures

Caricature of Leonard Courtney MP, 1832-1918. ...

Image via Wikipedia

This is another in a series of posts comprising an introduction to special education law. This series is meant to be an introduction for newbies and a refresher course for more experienced readers. Please let us know what you think about the series.

Today's post and the next post concern some unusual procedural issues in due process hearings. The due process hearing is the administrative law equivalent of a trial in a civil action.

A. Hearing Procedures

1. 5 day Disclosure Rule

This rule provides that where a party does not disclose its evidence (generally at least an exchange of exhibits and list of witnesses) at least five business days prior to the due process hearing, such evidence may not be admitted.

34 C.F.R. § 300.512(a)(3), & (b)(1)-(2); IDEA, § 615(f)(2) (evaluations only).

(Most hearing officers do not like the technicality nature of the 5 day rule. Most will enforce if a continuance or other procedural maneuver will not cure it.)

2. Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint

The reauthorized statute provides that a party receiving a due process complaint may challenge the sufficiency of the complaint within 15 days of receipt. The due process hearing officer must make a determination on the face of the complaint (and notice) concerning sufficiency within 5 days.

IDEA, § 615 (c)(2); 34 C.F.R. § 300.508 (d).

(Most courts have imposed a relatively deferential standard for sufficiency. See, Anello v. Indian River Sch Dist 107 LRP 7179 (Del. Family Ct. 1/192007)

Educational Law

Trainings of Dispute Resolution Professionals

Harkin Amendment Would Blunt Sequester Cuts to Special Ed

Sequestration Will Hurt Kids With Disabilities

Breaking: New 20 Year Study on Effects of Bullying