Lisa Lightner

Yes, I do, though maybe not in the way you're thinking. The present levels stuff I have is for teachers who contribute to IEPs. https://dontiepalone.com/iep-bundle-teachers/ I have lots of sample Present Levels statements, goals, accommodations, and other IEP examples in those IEP Toolkits (now sold as a bundle). I also have several articles on Present Levels. https://adayinourshoes.com/present-levels-iep/ One thing I would caution against is trying to make the Present Levels "strongly worded." Instead, make them specific, objective, and data-driven. A statement backed by data is much harder for a team to dismiss than one that's simply written with stronger language. For example, instead of saying your son has "major executive functioning challenges" or "severe work avoidance," I'd want the IEP to describe exactly what that looks like. How often does he initiate work independently? How many assignments are incomplete? How many prompts does he require? What happens when supports are removed? What is the educational impact? https://adayinourshoes.com/task-avoidance-task-initiation/ https://adayinourshoes.com/teaching-task-initiation/ For students who are cognitively strong, schools often spend a lot of time describing their strengths while minimizing how their disability affects their ability to access their education. "He's very bright" or "He's capable of grade-level work" doesn't tell the team why he's not making meaningful progress. The Present Levels should clearly explain how his executive functioning, emotional regulation, anxiety, or work-avoidant behaviors affect his ability to complete work, participate in class, make progress toward goals, and access the curriculum. That's the information that drives appropriate goals, accommodations, and services. Since you mentioned that his therapeutic school tends to downplay his needs, I'd also compare his progress reports to the actual data. Do the grades, missing assignments, behavior logs, teacher emails, or other documentation tell the same story? If not, that's something I would absolutely raise at the IEP meeting and ask the team to explain. And one last tip: whenever you see phrases like "needs occasional prompting," "sometimes struggles," or "making progress," ask for the data behind those statements. How much prompting? How often? What data shows he's making progress? Vague language is one of the biggest red flags I see in Present Levels. The more specific and measurable they are, the better the rest of the IEP will be.

Posting for a reader: Do you have templates or examples of specific and strongly worded Present Levels statements for highly cognitive teens who face social, emotional, and major executive functioning challenges? My son's therapeutic school tends to downplay his needs in his IEP and progress reports. While he has significant potential, his progress has been severely limited by massive work-avoidant behaviors. Any resources you could share to help ensure his IEP accurately reflects and addresses his challenges would be greatly appreciated.

First, I'm so sorry this happened to your son. No child should be afraid to get on the van just to get to school. And yes, I can tell you that the same thing happened to my son years ago. So yes, it absolutely can be done. In our particular case, it escalated quickly. The other boy decided that he just did not like my child (both have profound autism) and then it culminated in the other boy actually breaking Kevin's seizure helmet. I was seeing red, believe me. A few thoughts: The school district cannot simply shrug and say, "Well, the transportation company hasn't figured it out yet." The district is ultimately responsible for ensuring your child receives transportation safely if transportation is part of his educational program. Contracting with a private transportation company doesn't transfer that responsibility. If they promised you last year that your son would be on a different van, I would immediately put everything in writing (if you haven't already). I'd send an email to the special education director, transportation director, and your son's case manager. Include inyour email: The assault that occurred last year. The other dangerous behaviors you witnessed or were told about. The district's assurance that your son would be assigned to a different van this school year. That, as of today, they have not implemented that solution. That you are requesting written confirmation of the transportation plan before school begins. I would also state plainly that your son cannot safely ride with the student who assaulted him and that you are requesting transportation that allows him to access his education safely. Mention the possibilities of what could happen if this is not fixed (serious injury, school refusal). Keep everything in email/writing. (You know that's one of my favorite pieces of advice.) Would I hire an attorney today? Probably not as my very first step. I'd first create a solid paper trail showing that you've notified the district of the safety concern and given them an opportunity to fix it. If they refuse, ignore you, or insist he ride anyway despite the documented safety concerns, then it may be time to consult a special education attorney or advocate in your state. One other question: Is transportation listed as a related service on your son's IEP? If so, that strengthens your position because the district has an obligation to provide that service in a manner that is safe and appropriate. Don't let anyone minimize this by calling it "a transportation issue." Your son cannot benefit from his education if he's terrified to get on the van every day. I'd start with the paper trail. If they still refuse to act, then we can talk about the next escalation steps.

Posting for a reader: I have a question regarding the transportation for my son that his local public school provides. Last year at the end of the school year my son was attacked by another student on the same van. The student also pulled another child’s hair and also grabbed the van driver’s arm while driving. The other child goes to the same private school as my son but is a student in another school district, but the same county as we live in. The school is not in our county it is about 48 miles each way. The public schools have a contract with a local company to provide bus and van services. So they do not have the transportation hired directly. I was told that last year that by this coming school year they would put our son on a different van so that he would not need to be scared every time he got onto the van going to or from school. I am now being told that as of today they still have not resolved it van situation for this coming school year. I am not going to put my son in danger going to or from school anymore. I need some advice as to what my rights are. Should I contact a lawyer to get this problem resolved or what can I do.

One of our community members shared something that got me thinking. She's a Reading Interventionist and former Special Education teacher. A parent recently told her that another student sometimes makes comments that make her child feel "stupid" for getting reading help. Oof. First, that parent's response was exactly right. She had great advice for him, reminding him that we all have things we are good at and things we need more work on. That's true for kids and adults. But it got us wondering... What can we teach kids to say in these moments? Not every child is ready to ignore it and walk away. Some kids feel more confident when they have a few phrases prepared ahead of time. So let's crowdsource some ideas. If another student says something like: • Why do you leave for reading? • Are you in the dumb group? • Why do you need extra help? What are some responses a student could use? Examples: ✔ Everyone learns differently. ✔ I'm working on my reading skills. ✔ Lots of people get extra help with things. ✔ This is what helps me learn. Parents, teachers, and students, what would you add to the list? Let's build a resource together that helps kids respond with confidence instead of feeling ashamed for getting the support they need.

When a child’s anxiety is high and their emotions are all over the place, that’s usually a nervous system issue first and an academic issue second. If he’s feeling overwhelmed and lost, pushing forward academically often backfires. It can reinforce the “I can’t do this” feeling rather than build skills. Going back to easier basics is not the same as “holding him back.” It can be strategic. If he’s missing foundational pieces, filling those gaps can actually accelerate progress later. Confidence and competence build on each other. The bigger question isn’t whether he’s putting his “all” into it. It’s whether the work is at the right instructional level and whether he feels safe and capable while doing it. A regulated child can learn. A dysregulated child usually can’t access what they know. You might consider: – Identifying exactly where the breakdown happened (specific skills, not just grade level) – Temporarily reducing volume while increasing success – Adding predictable structure so he knows what to expect each day – Separating “he won’t try” from “this feels too hard” Advancement doesn’t always look like moving ahead in the curriculum. Sometimes it looks like rebuilding stamina, confidence, and skill depth.

A reader emailed me: My grandson was home schooled Part of last year and part of this year and started back to home school in January and doesn’t want to go back, his anxiety is high and emotions are all over. I feel it I because the program we used didn’t follow the school and he is feeling overwhelmed and lost. I plan on home schooling again. Should I go back to the easier basics so he is more comfortable but am worried he will not keep advancing if he doesn’t put his all in to it. Thoughts?

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.

You’re not off base at all. In fact, your instincts here are exactly what any evaluator, advocate, or data-driven teacher would say: if the grades aren’t accurate, the data can’t be used to make instructional decisions. A few points you can include in your reply to the teacher or in the IEP meeting: 1. It’s not about “passing vs failing”it’s about skill acquisition. A 65% and an 8% may both be technically failing, but they tell very different stories about your daughter’s decoding, comprehension, writing, task completion, and general access to the curriculum. Inflated grades erase the picture you need in order to support her. 2. This practice undermines IEP progress monitoring. IEP teams rely on accurate performance data to determine present levels, goal mastery, and whether accommodations and services are effective. If the numbers aren’t real, the team loses the ability to make informed decisions—and your outside evaluation won’t match the school data. 3. You can acknowledge the teacher’s intent while still correcting the issue. Most teachers who do this are trying to prevent a student from being crushed by a failing grade or are following a building-level practice they’ve been told is “helpful.” A script you can use: “I appreciate that you’re trying to support her emotionally and academically. My concern is that for IEP purposes esp with new evaluation results coming, we need accurate data so we can pinpoint where she’s struggling. Even if the grade is low, it helps us understand what level of support is actually needed.” 4. You can request a team discussion without making it personal. This is a data-collection and IEP-implementation issue, not a teacher-blaming issue. You can say: “Could we clarify as a team how grades should reflect actual performance? I want to make sure we’re collecting authentic data so we can align her services to her needs.” 5. What the teacher is doing isn’t best practice. Grade inflation for students with disabilities is incredibly common, but it’s also one of the top reasons students look “fine on paper” while falling further behind. If her real performance is an 8%, it’s a sign that the current IEP isn't addressing the gap, not a sign that her grades need softening. 6. The timing is actually ideal. You have an outside assessment ready to go. This discrepancy between “reported grades” and “actual ability” is exactly the kind of evidence that strengthens your case for stronger supports, services, and maybe even modified curriculum or more direct instruction. I have a ton more information about this-- https://adayinourshoes.com/goals-grades-iep-special-education/ https://adayinourshoes.com/adverse-educational-impact/ https://adayinourshoes.com/child-does-not-qualify-for-an-iep/

Reader question: My 6th grader has an established IEP that I'm not satisfied with. We've actually had an outside educational assessment completed and I meet for that feedback appointment this Friday. I've just realized that her ELA teacher is making a note of my daughter's actual grade (which is sometimes an 8%..) but the teacher is loading 65% as her grade. When I asked her about it, she shared, "The speech bubble is the actual grade she made on the assignments. I went back on Monday and changed her 60's and put them in as a 65 instead, because a 65 and 44 are both failing, but the 65 is easier to bring up. I don't mind doing this to help her since she is completing 6th grade level work, while her reading level is below grade level." I'm really uncomfortable with this because it is not accurate data collection. An 8% is very far away from a 65% in terms of us thinking about her understanding and level of support needed. Am I off base here? I want to maintain a good relationship with this teacher, who has attended my daughter's IEP meetings in the past. But I feel like putting in inaccurate scores is data collection 101..

The bills you’re describing in Wisconsin aren’t happening in a vacuum. What you’re seeing—vague “disruptive behavior” language, broadened removal authority, mandatory parental notifications, and zero disability protections—is part of a coordinated national movement. And yes, it’s absolutely tied to the larger “law and order,” anti-public-schools, anti-inclusion policy wave we’ve been watching for years. Here’s what’s behind it, and what’s driving the similarity of these bills across states. These bills match the pattern of ALEC-style model legislation While ALEC hasn’t released one single widely publicized discipline “model bill,” the structure of AB613/AB614 follows the playbook: Broad definitions of “disruption” Increased teacher authority to remove students A required re-entry condition (often disguised as a “BIP requirement”) Mandatory reporting requirements framed as “parental rights” Exemptions for private/voucher schools Zero mention of IDEA protections That combination is too consistent to be random. In multiple states, lawmakers have referred to “model discipline legislation” they are “adapting,” which is usually legislative shorthand for ALEC, the Heritage Foundation, or a state-level conservative policy shop providing the template. Heritage’s Project 2025 absolutely includes a discipline agenda Project 2025 has an explicit goal of: Increasing “school safety authority” Weakening federal civil rights oversight Removing “barriers” to discipline Reducing “overreach” of IDEA, Section 504, and OCR Shifting control from federal protections to state-level discretion That “re-entry requirement” you noticed? It’s completely aligned with the Heritage position that districts should be able to exclude students who require behavior supports without worrying about IDEA compliance. So yes this is connected. AEI’s Conservative Education Reform Network (CERN) is part of this ecosystem Daniel Buck is not random.CERN regularly pushes: Zero-tolerance discipline “Order and culture” frameworks Reduced “behavioral accommodation expectations” for teachers Opposition to restorative practices Narratives about inclusion harming “classroom learning” CERN content is often directly cited in state-level hearings in TX, FL, AL, and now WI. AEI isn’t the originator, but it is the megaphone. Voucher and privatization lobbies are heavily involved One major red flag you already noted: These bills never apply to voucher or private schools.!!!!!!! That’s intentional. The architecture is: Make public schools seem chaotic and unsafe Strip public schools of tools and funding Increase public frustration Expand vouchers as the “solution” Funnel tax dollars into private schools not bound by civil rights law Reduce overall public investment in IDEA enforcement The discipline bills are part of the destabilization strategy. Disability and civil rights organizations are waving massive red flags DRCs, COPAA, NDRN, and state disability councils have all flagged identical concerns across multiple states: Increased removals of disabled students Disproportionate removal of Black and brown students Clear FERPA violations disguised as “parental rights” IDEA re-entry restrictions that directly violate federal law Lack of funding for mandated interventions Backdoor pathways to removing students who require support Every state sees the same pattern because the bills are drawing from the same origin sources. What’s different about Wisconsin’s versions? From what you described, WI’s bills have two particularly extreme elements: Same-day classroom-wide notification for any removal or emergency drill This absolutely chills inclusion. Peers and parents will deduce exactly who was removed. Requiring a BIP for re-entry Schools are not legally permitted to condition access to FAPE on completion of a Behavior Intervention Plan. That’s why you felt in your gut that this is an IDEA violation—it is. The broader context: gutting OSEP and federal oversight The timing is coordinated: Federal moves to weaken OSEP State bills weakening discipline protections Simultaneous voucher expansion Increased attacks on inclusion More rhetoric about “dangerous” or “disruptive” students All of these pieces fit together into the long-term strategy of: Shift control to states → strip oversight → reframe disability supports as burdens → expand privatization. You’re not imagining the pattern. The one piece of good news in WI Your Democratic governor’s veto is a meaningful barrier right now. But the presence of these bills indicates where the agenda is headed long-term. Your response (writing legislators, pushing for funding, naming the FERPA and IDEA violations, and coordinating with WI BPDD) is exactly what stops these bills from passing quietly under the radar. And your instincts are correct: this is bigger than Wisconsin. This is part of a national movement to rewrite discipline and inclusion norms in public education.

Posting with permission from email: Good afternoon Lisa! I've been a longtime follower in your FB A Day In Our Shoes group and really appreciate your posts and perspectives. I'm also quite active in state disability advocacy. I live in WI, am very active with our Board for People w/Developmental Disabilities (WI BPDD) and completed their Partners In Policy-making training about 10 years ago. The reason I'm reaching out today is because WI Republicans have introduced a couple of very alarming education related bills re discipline and parental rights/notification this week. I sat thru a livestream of most of the discussion and public testimony at an education committee public hearing yesterday. I'll give you a few WI specific details, but I did a quick search and see that TX passed a similar bill and FL and AL are also discussing similar sounding bills - most call it a "Teachers Bill of Rights" and the conservatives are stressing the need to bring "Law and Order" back into schools, to "control" student behavior better, to stop "disruptive" students from interfering with the learning for other students. Are you aware of any bill mills or conservative groups that are churning out these types of school discipline bills? I'm wondering if ALEC or voucher lobby or Project 2025 is pushing this. Seems like some similar language and similar harshly punitive measures are included regardless of state. WI may have worse reporting/notification requirements than other states. One of the most ardent supporters, and disturbing testimonies, was from a young man named Daniel Buck who works at AEI in the Conservative Education Reform Network (CERN). I know AEI is a right-wing, partisan org but I'm not familiar w/CERN. In WI the bills (AB613 and AB614) use vague language and subjective judgment to expand the definition of "disruptive" behavior that would qualify for a teacher removing a student from the class. Includes the student being too "boisterous," too loud, "interrupting" instructional time, not complying with classroom rules, along with safety concerns or actual violence. Then would require a BIP be in place before the student could return to the same classroom (conservatives called it the "re-entry requirement" which frankly sounds like an IDEA violation.) Additionally, any time a student is removed from a classroom for any reason (disruptive student or even emergency drills) the principal is mandated to send an email notification to every parent in the classroom before 5 pm on the *same day* as the incident. The bill authors claim that since the disruptive student won't be specifically named, that these notifications do not breech student privacy rights. (Of course all advocates, and indeed the WI Disability Rights office, are calling out this blatant FERPA violation.) On top of that, none of the state's voucher schools or private schools are included in mandates of these bills. And students with disabilities are not exempted or protected in any way in this bill. And of course this is an unfunded mandate. It was immediately clear from reading thru the first time that this makes it easier for teachers to exclude students with disabilities and will jeopardize all gains re inclusive public schools. The likely ostracizing of students w/disabilities, students of color and their families is very concerning. And on top of the federal govt gutting OSEP feels very discouraging. I'm not freaking out because we have a Democratic Governor who supports public education and even if the bills pass, he will veto them. And I'm writing to my state representatives to advocate for increased funding, smaller class size, additional resources and prof devt, more staffing, more support services, etc. I'm also contacting my Federal legislators to protect IDEA/Dept of Ed. Just wondering what you are seeing/hearing about "safety" or "teacher rights" bills in different states. Part 2: You are welcome to use the info I shared as a lead for your own article/post and fine to leave in references to WI. Wisconsinites didn't get very much lead time, but it was a publicly noticed hearing for our state Assembly Committee on Education and a recording is available by the non-profit media organization called WisEye. (If you'd like a link to the recording, just let me know. But I also understand you may be more interested in broad strokes rather than a deep dive into a specific state's proposals.) I've put a pin in CERN to go back and get more info later. I'm interested in getting a bit more background on Daniel Buck, the AEI and CERN guy. He seems quite young but claims to have been a classroom teacher (English at middle school level), an Administrator (maybe Asst Principal at an elite or private charter) and now an "expert" on discipline in k-12 public schools - which seems like a rather fast career arc and reminds me of Michelle Rhee (who was also very connected/funded by voucher special interests.) I also thought it odd that when I was doing a quick search re other states, Daniel Buck's name kept coming up. He not only had an op-ed specific to these WI discipline bills in our local Milw Journal-Sentinel newspaper, but he had published the same post in a bunch of private college student newspapers (USC, Duke, Texas A&M and Clemson were high up in search results, there may have been others.) And he also published the same post in a handful of professional sports teams "news" sites for fans (NOLA's Saints, Baltimore Ravens, etc. all under a USA Today banner.) Why would a student in NC or a football fan in LA care about a state bill in WI? His highlighted subhead was "I hope partisan politics doesn’t prevent legislators from scoring these obvious wins for WI schools." But he's the one supporting partisan politics and clearly a paid private lobbyist. And these bills are a tremendous loss for students with disabilities and students of color. Also, FWIW, there is another WI player that is huge in attacking public schools. That would be WI Inst for Law and Liberty (WILL). They've been at it for over a decade but have grown their staff and are wickedly well funded. They frequently threaten or do sue local school districts, push the toxic "parent rights" bills, and partnered with some WI chapters of Moms for Liberty. WILL seems to be a mush of private voucher lobbyists, libertarians and tea-party conservatives. Primary donor is the Bradley Fndn, but similar to Koch network, they are enmeshed with many other far-right groups. Anyway, I appreciate your interest and look forward to reading your article.

You are doing the work of three systems—parent, advocate, and tutor—because the school system keeps failing both of your girls. And you’re right: time really is the most critical factor for dyslexia intervention. Everything you’ve described (gaslighting, “she’s smart so she doesn’t need help,” Response-to-Intervention purgatory, private interventions doing the heavy lifting) is extremely common in dyslexia cases. Let’s break down your actual questions, because they’re the part you can take action on right now. What happens to an IEP when a child is homeschooled? An IEP only applies to public school enrollment. If you withdraw to homeschool: The IEP becomes inactive, not “closed” or “deleted.” The district still has Child Find obligations, meaning they must evaluate a homeschooled child if you request it. You do not receive special education services automatically while homeschooling. Some states allow limited services through “equitable services” plans—look at your state's regs to find what is available to you So: If you homeschool, the IEP stops being implemented. You become the service provider. You essentially are waiving your right to FAPE. That doesn’t mean you’re shut out of supports forever—you can always re-enroll later and the district must evaluate again. Can your eldest still participate in "this" Club and orchestra while homeschooling? This part varies by state and by district policy. In Missouri: The state does not require districts to allow homeschooled students to participate in extracurriculars. Many districts do allow partial participation (especially band/orchestra), but it’s local policy, not a right. You would need to check your district’s board policy under “homeschool participation” or “nonpublic student activities.” If the district says no, you’d look at: Community orchestras Youth music programs at local colleges Church or community clubs Online or homeschool academic competitions 4-H, Scouts, or STEAM clubs Dyslexia-friendly book clubs or enrichment groups Middle-school extracurriculars can be rebuilt, but you’ll want clarity before you make any decisions. Why your youngest “doesn’t qualify” — even with an outside dyslexia diagnosis This is another common pattern: Schools over-rely on: High IQ Good grades Processing speed “She’s not failing” “She’s doing well enough” But IDEA does not require a child to fail to qualify. It requires: A disability AND an educational impact The IEE showing dyslexia is educational impact. Poor oral reading fluency is educational impact. Needing 2–3 hours of private tutoring weekly is educational impact. Schools simply don’t want to open IEPs for kids who appear “bright,” because they mistakenly assume dyslexia can be outsmarted. You are not imagining the gaslighting. You are not imagining the delays. And you are not imagining the difference private tutoring makes—because fidelity and intensity matter, and that’s exactly what schools often avoid providing. If you homeschool now, can you return later with an IEP? Yes. If you re-enroll: You immediately request evaluations The district must respond within legal timelines Your previous IEP and IEEs still matter as data They cannot require you to “try RTI again” before evaluating You are not locked out for life. Is homeschooling the only way to get them what they need? Not necessarily, but many dyslexia families choose it because: They’re already doing the tutoring They’re already providing the curriculum They’re already filling all the gaps They’re exhausted from fighting for basic literacy Your youngest is getting more structured literacy at home and with private tutors than most districts ever provide. Your eldest is thriving academically because of what you arranged outside of school—not because the school delivered structured intervention consistently. Homeschooling may reduce the daily battles, but you’d be trading those battles for the responsibility of designing their academic roadmap. Big picture: what you’re experiencing is a systemic failure, not a parenting failure This is the dyslexia cycle many families fall into: School delays evaluation School minimizes results Child falls years behind Parents privately tutor School uses the private progress to deny services Child internalizes “I’m not smart enough” Parents become the only consistent intervention provider Eventually the whole system feels unsustainable You’re not wrong to consider homeschooling. You’re also not wrong to keep pushing the district. Either path is valid; the right choice is the one that protects your girls’ mental health, self-esteem, and access to structured literacy.

I have two daughters, ages 11 (dyslexia and ADHD) and 7 (mild dyslexia; attention issues but not considered ADHD). My eldest has an IEP (obtained in late 3rd- Spring 2023/early 4th grade Fall 2023; private diagnosis of dyslexia and ADHD was done outside of school by Oct 2023-Jan 2024 to have a specific name for her struggles). When I switched from the choice school she was attending at the time of her initial IEP (who seemed to have a good reputation on paper), back to our district school, she was reading approximately 3-4 grades below level. I switched b/c the school team was dragging their feet about helping her (Just read to her/Response to Intervention purgatory for a couple years before finally evaluating her etc., then , using weak IEP goals and interventions, while simultaneously telling me how talented and skilled they were, and 'that she was being educated by the best...she's smart, maybe she'll catch up someday...etc.' I also noticed that my youngest (who was in kindergarten at the original school) was starting to struggle a bit with reading as well, and didn't want to face a similar process with her at the choice school. I enlisted the help of a mom who was getting training in Orton Gillingham the summer of the school switch (2024), then placed her in an online private tutoring program, Dyslexia On Demand-CALT tutors; Take Flight Program, by Fall 2024. The private interventions made the most difference. I started seeing progress with her reading improving by the Fall of 2024, even with just the mom helping her in the summer. She's also done really well with the Dyslexia on Demand tutors, and has improved by several grade levels in a year with them (reading at around a 4th grade level; up from K-1st or so when we left the previous school). The original school district (transfer school area), has been slightly more helpful for my eldest ( took temporary services from pro-bono lawyer and advocate), but got her IEP goals straightened out somewhat). I still wrestle with the schools a bit with appropriate programs, intensity, fidelity, etc. but it's a little better than the previous school. Eldest is currently in middle school in Jr Beta Club and orchestra etc., along with her core classes. I have struggled a bit more, however with advocating for my youngest. She is currently in the 2nd grade and I can't get an IEP for her. I had an advocate last year at transfer school (advocate no longer available this year, and I'm back to being gaslight more again this year). In May 2024 before we transferred, I had a CALT do a dyslexia screening which indicated struggle. School evaluated her, and explained away signs of struggle on her testing, and said no IEP needed (Fall/Winter 2024). Had an IEE via the district, which also found struggle, and she received a diagnosis of mild dyslexia and attention issues (Spring of 2025; school didn't meet with me before end of year to discuss it). Fall 2025: School data and evaluations indicate poor oral reading fluency, as well, but the school team said, that because her IQ was above average, high processing speed and grades were good so far, no IEP needed (despite IEE results as well as standardized testing indicating reading struggle). I feel that time is of the essence. I'll do what I can to keep trying to get her an IEP, but I'm also looking into homeschooling. I am getting weary of wrestling to meet my girls' basic needs, being gaslit, delayed, denied, and wasting more precious time for them. I also want to customize their learning experience a bit more, improve their self esteem etc. (They often make comments about not being smart enough, and my eldest also sees a psychologist weekly for support after her experiences at the previous school). Question: What happens to the IEP when one goes the homeschool route? Can my eldest still access the school (name) Club and orchestra if in homeschool? Or would we need to seek community resources for this? I look forward to your thoughts.

This is incredibly frustrating, and what you’re seeing is a combination of federal rules and local interpretation, not a sign that students suddenly stopped needing support. If anything, I've always argued that when a child moves, and loses their "community" and friends etc., ,it should be expected that needs have increased, not decreased. Moving is stressful. Here’s what’s going on: 1. Federal law (IDEA) requires schools to honor an incoming IEP. When a military family transfers mid-year, the new district must provide services comparable to the previous IEP until it conducts its own evaluations and writes a new one. That’s not optional. 2. However, (your state) uses a very tight interpretation of eligibility categories. Some states are more flexible with diagnosing learning disabilities, autism, speech/language needs, or OHI (ADHD/anxiety). A child who qualifies in Colorado or Virginia may not meet Missouri’s criteria. This leads to: Parents arriving with a valid IEP The district “reviewing” it And then determining....sometimes very quickly....that the student “doesn’t qualify” under Missouri’s rules It feels like rejecting the IEP, but technically they are saying the student doesn’t meet state criteria once reevaluated. Know that I have seen this allllll over the place, in both military and non-military families who moved. Military families feel this more intensely because they move so often. Transitions mean repeated reevaluations, and Missouri’s stricter criteria create a pattern where incoming students repeatedly lose eligibility. Teachers often feel helpless watching it happen. You’re not imagining it, and you’re not the only one saying it. This has been raised at state and federal levels because it causes academic and emotional whiplash for kids. What families can do: Bring all outside evaluations with them Request Prior Written Notice when eligibility is denied Request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) if they disagree Document educational impact, not just test scores Connect with the installation EFMP office, this is exactly what they’re there for (there are other military resources too) Request stay-put protections when appropriate (during mid-year moves) And no, wanting services doesn’t equal “over-qualifying” students. These children had legally valid IEPs in their previous state. Missouri’s process simply creates a higher barrier. What you’re witnessing is exactly why parent advocates are needed.