|
IDEIA and NJ
State Code Areas of
concern/comments -highly
qualified:
the allowance for teachers not having age-appropriate content
knowledge for certain students needs to be clarified so as not to lower
expectations or limit access to the core curriculum content standards.
Related
services:
language should
be retained regarding “school health services” not just “services
provided by a nurse…” because 1) not all schools have nurses on staff
and 2) denial of school health services could result in the denial of FAPE
(Free Appropriate Public Education). Transition:
services cannot
be based on the disability because even within the same diagnosis, there
is a spectrum of abilities.
Additionally, NJ should return to its original decision to begin
transition at 14, not 16.
-manifestation
determination review:
burden of proof has now shifted to parents who now have to prove
the behavior was caused by the child’s disability. This erodes
discipline protections for families.
Stay put:
Until proven
otherwise, the placement should not change until a decision is made to
avoid unnecessary disruption for the student. Resolution
Session:
The decision
must be in writing and I agree that the meeting cannot include the
school’s attorney unless the parent has an attorney.
I personally faced my first confrontation with a district in
mediation across from the school’s attorney whom I didn’t even know
would be present.
-elimination
of short-term objectives/benchmarks:
these served as steps towards reaching annual goals and elimination
would negatively affect outcomes for children if progress isn’t being
regularly monitored.
In addition, IEP progress reports serve the same purpose,
particularly in light of NCLB, and should be retained in the state code. -state
flexibility:
In NJ, there is
now a family cost share for Part C so parents would need to be aware that
if they opt to continue early intervention, they would not be eligible for
FAPE. -Personnel
Qualifications:
Paraprofessionals
in private schools for the disabled that do not receive Title I funds are
exempt; children with the most severe disabilities often end up in out of
district placements and would actually be left with the person (parapro)
with the least experience in these cases.
Participation
in Assessments:
In addition to
standardized assessments, alternate assessments need to be developed for
both the same achievement as standardized assessments as well as alternate
achievement standards. State
Advisory Panel:
It should be a
given to include representation from the Parent Training and Information
Center. Overidentification/disportionality:
There needs to
be a mechanism for accountability, not just data collection. BACK |