Bullying: A Hot Button Issue In Special Education Part II

Bullying on IRFE in March 5, 2007, the first c...Image via Wikipedia
This is the second post in the series on bullying.  The first post last week looked at the current news on the subject.  Today we will look at some of the basic bullying caselaw.  Next week we will look at some of the recent caselaw.

Here are the cornerstone cases:
In Shore Regional High Sch Bd. of Educ v. P.S. 41 IDELR 234, 381 F.3d 194, (3d Cir. 8/30/04), the Third Circuit held that the school district’s failure to stop bullying may constitute a denial of FAPE. Bullies constantly called the student names, threw rocks and hit him with a padlock. Despite repeated complaints, the bullying continued and the student eventually attempted suicide. This was the first case at the federal appellate level to analyze bullying under IDEA.  You can read the opinion by then Circuit Judge Alito here.

In Lillbask ex rel Mauclaire v. State of Connecticut Dept. of Educ.  397 F.3d 77, 42 IDELR 230 (2d Cir. 2/2/05).  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an IDEA hearing officer has the authority to review IEP safety concerns.  The court provided an expansive interpretation of the jurisdiction of the hearing officer, ruling that Congress intended the hearing officer to have authority over any subject matter that could involve a denial of or interference with a student’s right to receive FAPE, including safety concerns that might affect receipt of FAPE.

See also, Preschooler II v. Clark County Sch Bd of Trustees 47 IDELR 151, 479 F.3d 1175 (9th Cir. 3/21/7); Stringer v. St. James R-1 Sch. Dist. 45 IDELR 179, 466 F.3d 799 (8th Cir. 5/3/6); Scruggs v. Meriden Bd. of Educ. 44 IDELR 59 (D.Conn. 8/22/05); RP & MP ex rel KP v. Springdale Sch Dist 107 LRP 9778(W.D. Ark 2/21/7); Walden v. Moffett 46 IDELR 159(E.D.Calif 8/28/6).

Other courts have ruled that in certain cases involving bullying, the parent may not have to exhaust administrative remedies before proceeding to court to pursue possible money damages. See, Blanchard v. Morton Sch. Dist. 420 F.3d 918, 44 IDELR 29 (9th Cir. 8/19/05); Walden v. Moffett 46 IDELR 159 (E.D. Calif 8/28/6); Scruggs v. Meriden 44 IDELR 59 (D.Conn 8/22/05). 

These issues may well transcend special education. The Columbine tragedy raised our national consciousness concerning bullying and harassment of all kinds in the schools. The issue, however, has a big impact upon special education. Many children with disabilities report that they have been bullied.
Enhanced by Zemanta

New Stop Added to Jim Gerl 2011 Special Education Law Tour

Off the Plaza in Santa Fe, New MexicoImage via Wikipedia



As the season changes, I have begun to acquire a few additional speaking engagements for the 2011 Jim Gerl Special Education Law Tour. I enjoy seeing this great country and meeting those who enjoy reading this blog.  It is very satisfying to speak with those who utilize this tool for special education stakeholders of all types.

The newest stop added to the 2011 tour is the annual conference of the National Association of Hearing Officials.  I have been lucky enough to be a regular faculty member for NAHO for the last seven years.  NAHO is a group of hearing officers.  They are not just special ed hearing officers but all kinds of hos.  You can learn more about this fantastic organization here.

The annual conference will be held in Santa Fe, New Mexico form November November 13 - 16. This conference is a must for the hearing officers of the world.  I hope that I will see you there.
Conference details for all stops on the tour are included in the semi-permanent (I love that word) box on the lefthand side of the blog.
There are a few more possible additions to the tour agenda; I'll keep you posted.  By the way, these do not include in-house engagements where the public is excluded.  

If you will be at these conferences or if you are in the neighborhood, please find me and say hello.  I'm pretty hard to miss!
Enhanced by Zemanta

Bullying: A Hot Button Issue in Special Education Law Part I

from http://speier.house.gov/ main pageImage via Wikipedia
I predicted back in July 2007 that bullying based upon disabilities was a hot button issue in special education law.  Unfortunately, disability based bullying seems to be increasing rather than decreasing.

Last month a number of advocacy groups issued a report: "Walk a Mile in Their Shoes."  You can review the report on the abilitypath.org website

Last week the President and First Lady convened an anti-bullying summit at the White House.

This week Representative  Jackie Speier (D-CA) and Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) convened a briefing on the issue of bullying of kids with disabilities.  Reports note that Rep. Speier is planning on introducing legislation requiring school districts to report bullying and to spell out the number of bullying incidents that involve kids with disabilities as targets.

A new government website provides students, teachers, administrators and other with tools to end bullying.  Visit www.stop.bullying.gov/
  
More next week on the legal issues raised by bullying in Part II of this series.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Are 80% of Schools Leaving Children Behind?

WASHINGTON - MARCH 10:  U.S. President Barack ...Image by Getty Images via @daylife

President Obama gave a major address on education yesterday.  He spoke at a middle school in Arlington, Virginia.  The speech provided an outline of the changes he will be proposing to the No Child Left Behind act.  You can read the speech here.

The portion of the address that got the most reaction was the claim by Education Secretary Duncan, that was repeated by the President, that 80% of schools in the country are failing under the NCLB standard.  20% won't get you a passing grade in many classrooms.

The President applauded the goals of NCLB.  Accountability and high standards are still a part of the playbook.  Shining a light on the achievement gap, between black and white students, and between those with and without disabilities, was also lauded in the President's speech.

One statement by the President was particularly encouraging.  Those of you who read this blog regularly know that I hate standardized tests.  They are particularly not suited for measuring good schools vs bad schools.  Poor children, for example, do not perform well on standardized tests.  I could go on, but I won't.

In the president's speech, he embraced the concept of measuring individual student progress vs. standardized tests.  Many of us advocate this method.  Yes, there are problems.  Even with the computerization of our society, it is a lot harder to measure the collective progress of individual kids than to have them sit for a big test, particularly if the kids have serious cognitive problems.  But this seems to be the new direction and that is great.  From a standpoint of fundamental fairness the progress method is a big improvement.

The changes still have to make their way through the Congress.  Lately the U. S. Congress has not been an inspiring place.  So hold your breath and get ready to write to your representatives.  This process of being a citizen is pretty time consuming, but it sure beats the alternative doesn't it?

So what do you think.  Should other changes be made to NCLB?  Do you like the President's approach?  Does the focus on the achievement gap help kids with disabilities?
Enhanced by Zemanta