If school removed an area of support/need from IEP should that be reflected on PWN/NOREP?

[AM23]

Hi,

We're in PA. My son's draft annual IEP shows he met his writing goal and says due to the goal being met the school thinks he no longer has a need in writing/written expression, and therefore there's no goal and no instruction in the new draft. We disagree with this, because he did not meet the goal independently. His work was edited and used teacher conferencing with no data showing what his writing looks like on his own. We've provided staff writing  samples that show my son still needs extra help with writing and spelling. Additionally, at two previous IEP meetings, school staff agreed to add a goal for on-demand writing, to provide data on writing done independently, and to provide data as to what teachers are correcting/suggesting in his drafts, and school staff will not provide any of these now. Also removed from the IEP were instruction in executive functioning and social skills. Similarly, the IEP showed he met his executive function goal, but there was no data showing this other than some vague language that he checked his work. Is it reasonable to ask the school to explain on the PWN/NOREP why they feel my son no longer needs instruction in writing, social skills, and executive function?  In other words, should it based on data other than meeting a goal?

Thanks!

 

[Carolyn Rowlett]

I'm not in PA, so hopefully others with chime in regarding PA specifically.  In general, I would look at the language of the goal - does it say anything about writing independently?  Of course, even if it doesn't, that's the assumption - that supports are put in place in the gen ed setting UNTIL the goal can be met independently without support.

When you say "at two previous IEP meetings, school staff agreed to add a goal for on-demand writing," etc., why didn't that happen after the meeting(s) in which it was agreed upon?

With respect to the executive functioning goal, it would be necessary to also look at the language of this goal - was it only about checking his work?  If there was more, then the goal wasn't met.

To answer your question about data versus meeting a goal, they are intertwined.  It IS based on whether or not the goal is met (although a different goal may be needed, i.e., if he met a sentence-writing goal, he needs to more on to a paragraph goal), BUT the only way to tell if a goal is met is with DATA.  Have you been receiving quarterly progress monitoring reports?  The annual IEP can't just "show" he met his writing goal without data in the present levels.

Here are my suggestions:

1. In response to the PWN/NOREP, because it should be set forth on this document why a goal was removed, I would definitely request an explanation, but more importantly, the data behind the explanation.  Also cite the previous meetings in which a goal and data were agreed upon but never added.

2.  Since you are entitled to an evaluation every year, I would request one in the areas which have been removed - writing, executive functioning, and social skills.  They have to have data before they can remove these, and it sounds like they don't have it.  So request an evaluation.

[JSD24]

You can remove SDI & goals based on progress monitoring reports.  What I'm seeing is that you don't agree with the reports because the goal was reached with accommodations and you want to see your child move toward doing this without accommodations.  I would create a paper trail that gets the school to say your child had accommodations with meeting this goal so he still has delays in this area and given there still are delays, you see the need for Specially Designed Instruction and goals to catch him up to what same-age classmates can do.  If the school isn't cooperating with a paper trail that shows the accommodations, ask that the school do a special ed assessment in this area.  A special ed eval/assessment gets done by a school psychologist where the progress monitoring is done by a case manager/special ed teacher and they aren't trained with doing normed special ed evaluations.  You'll need to sign of on a PTR (permission to reevaluate) so the eval can be done.  When you work on the paper trail, copy the school psychologist on the email.  I'm hoping this could get the case manager to see that a goal reached with accommodations does not show a student is independent in this area.

You also had a post about an IEE.  I'm assuming the 2 posts are about the same student.  I'm not sure with looking at both posts who evaluated your child as far as writing goes.  A normed special ed eval needs to be done by someone trained to do the eval so the testing protocol gets followed.  Normed evals wouldn't allow a student to have accommodations unless the accommodations were documented in the eval report.  If the protocol wasn't followed, the eval is not valid so you can't use the results.  Not sure about asking to see the evaluation where your child's writing was assessed - if the paperwork still exists.  Definitely ask your child what sort of help was provided when the eval was done.  If more than one person did the eval, that should be in the report.  In PA, teachers tend not to be trained to do evaluations.  They tend to be done by the school psychologist when it comes to assessing writing.  If a teacher who doesn't have the training to do evals are doing them, this falls into doing a state complaint.  I'm in PA & I can help you with this.

[AM23]

Carolyn and JSD24, thank you for your suggestions and input! Yes, my IEE post is about the same student as this post.

Yes, the special ed eval for speech and language, reading, and writing was done by the school psychologist. I plan to ask for more data supporting decision, why agreed upon goals and supports weren't added, and for evaluations in areas which have been removed.  The suggestion to focus on creating a paper trail saying accommodations were used to meet the goal and there are still needs in this area was helpful.

What are the pros and cons of asking for the special ed valuations now, with the agreement they'll be done at the beginning of the next school year, and waiting to ask in August/September? (I can overthink things, and maybe this doesn't matter.) Also, the reevaluation I referred to in my IEE post, was done almost exactly a year ago now, so I'm fairly certain the school would want to do new evals instead of agree to an IEE. Thanks again.

[Carolyn Rowlett]

Yes, the school will want to do their own re-evaluation BUT if you don't agree with their results, THEN you can ask for an IEE.  So start the process of requesting a re-evaluation as soon as possible.  (I would ask for it not only in the areas which have been removed, but also in the areas which are still in the IEP unless you are comfortable with the data in those areas, if any.)  Unfortunately, the IDEA doesn't define a time by which re-evaluations have to be done.  But since the director of spec ed probably works during the summer months, you can include her on your email request to make sure someone sees it.  Then follow up when school starts.  I would push hard for this to be done ASAP given that they removed services without data.  You will be required to sign a permission form before the re-evaluation can start, so ask for that on a weekly, then daily, basis until you receive it.  Although the IDEA does not define the timeline, the default is usually "withing a reasonable time," which has been defined to mean 60 days - similar to the initial evaluation.

[AM23]

Thanks Carolyn. I'll start putting my re-evaluation request together ASAP.

Anther question - How specific do I have to be about my concerns about reading and writing? For reading, I'd specify phonological awareness (advanced such as substitution, addition, and removal), fluency, accuracy, comprehension.....anything else? For writing, I'd include conventions, punctuation, capitalization, spelling, organization, and handwriting fluency for both on-demand writing and longer-form paragraph/essay writing.  Is there a standardized test for multi-paragraph writing that's expected in middle? I always feel like I am missing something on my lists of suspected disability, and then worry that specific thing I missed won't be evaluated, because I didn't know to include it. (I didn't know to include phonological awareness on the last eval.)

Finally, if I have concerns about auditory processing, is that something the school can assess or is that better to have done privately with an audiologist? 

Thank you!

[Carolyn Rowlett]

Also include phonics for reading as that is different from phonological awareness.

For writing, I think you've covered all the bases.  I would look at your state standards to see where he should be at his grade level for writing and state you are concerned he is not meeting those state standards.  I don't know if you'll be able to get anything for "handwriting fluency."  I think that this would be more of a fine motor skill and by the time a child is in middle school, it's past the time where it can be corrected other than practicing.  I'm guessing he has accommodations such as speech-to-text or typing?  I know you eventually want him to be able to write without accommodations, but "handwriting" without accommodations may be a losing battle. 

In general, keep in mind that it's the school's obligation to evaluate in all areas of suspected disabilities - not yours.  If they don't evaluated in an area that should have been, you would be entitled to request this in an IEE - they don't get a "do-over" if their evaluation isn't sufficient the first time.

Auditory processing disorder is something I would advise pursuing privately.  Most insurance covers this, as well as the therapy.  However, his IQ test may have shown low processing, which you can use for the time being as a reason for accommodations - extending time to process/respond, etc.

 

[JSD24]

My experience with auditory processing evals was that the school didn't accept the one I had done by an outside therapist.  The school did their own eval - actually, it was done at our IU (this is a PA thing) because you need a soundproof booth to do them.

As far as getting specific, less is more sometimes.  And the sooner you start the process, the sooner you'll have the eval completed.  My feeling is that you'll be 1st in line for the fall with asking now.