If he struggles with tests due to his disabilities and there are no supports in place to put him on an equal playing field with his peers, it would be discrimination. But I wouldn't recommend using that word right off the bat. I would ask for an IEP meeting to discuss (expedited - waive the 10 day notice requirement - due to the short basketball season) his accommodations and what needs to be put in place to help him with tests. If they refuse to or cannot convene a meeting in time, send an email to the IEP team (maybe copy director of spec ed) expressing your concern and the need to support your son as soon as possible. Suggest additional accommodations such as extended time, redirects, the ability to retake, take in non-distracting environment, etc. And stress that until these supports are put in place for his disabilities, he should not be punished (discriminated against) for failing tests.

My son is in 8th grade and has an IEP for ADHD & SPD. He struggling the first semester with his math teacher and it got to the point where she just wrote him office referrals for lunch detention multiple times a week. It was a toxic environment. His IEP Team and I decided changing teachers at semester would be a good idea and he's now been in the new class for 2 weeks. He's doing great and doing his work, etc. No behavior issues. Still struggles with being on task, distractions and starting assignments. The issue is that this new teacher only grades tests & quizzes, no assignments count towards his grade. Because of his struggles first semester, he's behind in math. We're working every night at home (have been all year). He notoriously doesn't do well on tests and has relied on assignments to keep his grade passing. Without those assignments, he's currently got an F. This excludes him from being able to play in any basketball games. The season is only 4 weeks long and he missed the first game already. The teacher is unwilling to count assignments or provide any extra credit work to help increase his grade. Since he's new to the class, we're still figuring out if extra accommodations it supports can be put in place. I'm looking for suggestions on how to handle this situation. It feels unfair to me that he's being excluded solely because this teacher grades differently. And my son is actively doing the work to learn the math so he can be successful but that's not gonna happen overnight. Sports are very important to him and hes viewed as a leader on his team. Its a huge motivator for school and being engaged in school. Hoping someone may know if legally they can exclude him from sports in this instance? Or if there's any suggestions for how to handle this situation? Thank you!

Recently, I declined to approve a post from a community member. It read: I'm helping out a friend who is trying to get help for her daughter, and I know this information, but I can't seem to find the specifics. What impact does it have on a school district based on the number of students they have receiving support? Is there some sort of benchmark they are trying to stay below or are they just denying it to show control? I declined the post and told her I don’t answer questions like that. Not to be mean. Not to call anyone out. But because that line of thinking sends parents down the wrong path. There’s a lot wrong with that advocacy strategy. Most importantly, it doesn’t work. It’s not child-focused. It says nothing about the child’s disability, their present levels, their skill deficits, or educational impact. And that’s not how 504 or IEP eligibility decisions are made. Let’s entertain it for a minute. Say I told her the district could only have 500 students receiving services and they were at 498. What are you going to do with that? Walk into the eligibility meeting and say, “A-ha! You’ve got two spots left, so this child gets one”? That’s not how this works. Or what if I told her the actual truth, that there is no cap under IDEA or Section 504 on how many students can receive services. Yes, federal auditors may look at over-reporting, but there is no set number a district has to stay under. Then what? Do you march into the meeting and accuse them of denying eligibility just to “show control”? How far do you think that gets you? I understand the frustration. I really do. When a school says no, the instinct is to look for the hidden reason. The budget. The politics. The control. But here’s what I’ve learned after years of doing this and training hundreds of parents: You win by staying relentlessly child-focused. The school likely denied services because they do not believe the child meets eligibility criteria. Yes, finances and district culture can influence decisions. I’m not naïve about that. But you don’t overturn denials by exposing motives. You overturn denials by building a case. You focus on: – Present levels – Educational impact – Data – Documentation – The legal criteria for eligibility That’s it. Even in difficult districts. Even when the answer starts as “no.” My clients — and parents inside the Don’t IEP Alone Academy — secure new services and eligibility decisions all the time. Not because I know a secret about district quotas. But because we focus on the right things. We keep the spotlight on the child. That’s what changes outcomes. If you’ve found yourself chasing theories about district motives instead of building your child’s case, that’s a sign you need strategy — not more frustration. That’s exactly what I teach inside the Don’t IEP Alone Academy. It’s not about being louder or catching the district in something. It’s about understanding how decisions are actually made — and positioning your child’s needs in a way that’s hard to dismiss. If you’re ready to stop spinning your wheels and start moving strategically--registration is open now, with 10% off. Join today: https://dontiepalone.com/academy/ and use the code RIGHTDIRECTION to get 10% off.

The only scores approaching “average to low average” are Processing Speed (80, Low Average), Working Memory (97, Average) and basic word reading (decoding). The PWN appears to selectively cite these isolated scores while ignoring the overwhelming body of evaluation data documenting significant deficits across all academically relevant domains. They are framing GAA 2.0 Eligibility and Modified Curriculum like they are one in the same (can't get modified because she doesn't qualify for GAA 2.0). They are referencing passing grades (that are routinely "curved" up) & "data", which I assume to be progress monitoring as holding more weight than all consistent evaluations. After digging into her progress monitoring, absolutely none of them demonstrate progress toward independent mastery. Two of her goals are not even being monitored in a way that would address the goal! For example, she has a goal to "rewrite a sentence with grammatical errors correctly". To monitor this, she is being given a multi-choice worksheet with 3 possible answers per sentence. She is simply guessing with a 33% chance of being correct and is not writing anything at all. Four of her goals note the condition: one one one with special education staff, no minutes are provided for 1:1 instruction, only small group and co-teaching in general education. I will continue to research what route to take in what is now a whole host of concerns.. from what I understand, all of these concerns justify a state complaint, I'm just not sure the best route.

Be prepared that they're going to talk in circles about the "one-on-one." They will argue that she has one-on-one support, and that's what they mean when it's mentioned in the goals. However, goals require INSTRUCTION and speak to INSTRUCTION, so don't let them talk their way out of that. Your order of operations looks pretty good. Not sure what you mean by "dismantle" the PWN, but I assume writing on it regarding with what you disagree. Also, I don't think they'll agree to your approach to "starting from scratch" regarding the IEP, especially if you don't have an advocate. A couple of other options are: 1. Request a facilitated IEP meeting if your state provides those. 2. Call your state department of education to see if they have any recommendations in this scenario and/or low-cost advocate referrals. 3. File a state complaint to get compensatory minutes for the one-on-one instruction she did not receive. (However, state complaints are tough to win because the state will bend over backwards to side with or accept the interpretation of the school district. So sometimes it's best NOT to get a formal answer, because then you're stuck with it. Mediation might prove more beneficial.) The reading scores are troublesome. She is "very low" in basic reading and and phonological processing, and "extremely low" in phonemic proficiency. She needs a basic reading goal! If these underlying foundational skills are not mastered, she will struggle even more in later grades. They only have a goal for reading comprehension and although this is a "higher level" skill and the assumption is often made that this means the lower level skills have already been mastered, students with learning differences often score higher in this area than in the phonological processing because they have memorized a lot of words and can figure out meanings and inferences from context. You need to make sure they go back and get the foundational skills mastered.

I can't believe I've read this document 821 times and never realized the discrepancy between "one on one with special education staff" and then.. no one on one with special education staff. I'm certain she has never received this service since the IEP was implemented in May 2025. I have to imagine this provides me with more leverage toward modification. Are there compensatory measures I should expect of the district is/since four of her goals stated "1:1" but her support has been provided in small group and co-teaching only? I have the next document cued up but I'll hold it. Hopefully they just agree to modification and we can start from scratch.