Brittney M

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.

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.

This is such a helpful perspective for me, you're absolutely right. I'm going to spend time educating myself on Tier 3 supports vs specialized construction because the team has been talking about them as one in the same. The math goal: "math instruction outside of the gen ed classroom with spec ed teacher" is the small group T3 math.. I've never caught that the goal states 1:1 which isn't happening, she's in a small group. I've sent the follow-up email awaiting the PWN re: denying my request for modified curriculum. I don't know what to do with these crap goals because I feel the whole IEP is foundationally flawed due to not modifying the curriculum to meet her abilities. I don't want to tweak these goals because they're meant to have her working at the grade standard, which is inappropriate.. I want the whole thing wiped clean, agreeing to modify her curriculum to K-3rd grade in various areas, and build goals from there. In my head, order of operations is: 1) Wait for PWN 2) Dismantle PWN or go to mediation if needed 3) Advocate for building a whole new IEP, based on modified curriculum, which would eliminate all of these shitty goals Is that what you would do at this point? I am so appreciative of your time.

These are her current goals.

She is currently in gen. ed. with Tier-3 math support so if I'm understanding everything correctly, math is the only class she is receiving specialized instruction. Her T3 math teacher, by the way, described in-detail that she is providing SO much "support" that any common person would call that spoon-feeding. She described how my daughter will simply point to a problem on the paper and nod when asked if she needs help. It's so far over her head that there isn't a specific 'part' of the problem or step that she needs help on.. it's the whole dang thing. Teacher will 'remind' her of the steps and then basically play a cat and mouse question game where I know my daughter is using the process of elimination to eventually land on an action or answer. And she has a 42% with THAT level of scaffolding.. All other deficits are being 'addressed' through accommodations only. In my opinion, they are acknowledging her deficits when grading / passing her rather than providing services to bridge those gaps.

We had another IEP meeting yesterday as I continue to fight for modified curriculum for my intellectually disabled 5th grader. This time, I brought the psychologist that provided the most recent (third) educational assessment. The meeting lasted 3.5hrs and we both left astounded. Below is the summary / follow-up that I have drafted to send the team. I would be so appreciative if you'd read it and tell me what on earth to do next. I am writing to document the concerns discussed during Zyriel Machovec’s IEP meeting and to request specific actions and documentation as outlined below. CONCERNS NOT RESOLVED Despite comprehensive evaluation data provided to the team, including the December 2, 2025 Educational Assessment by Dr. Dara Delancy, Psy.D., and the January 30, 2026 Written Expression Evaluation by Casey Edwards, M.S., CSP, the IEP team’s position is that modified curriculum is either not necessary or cannot be provided to Zyriel. It was shared that her IQ score does not fall within the range required for modified curriculum. Exhaustive data demonstrates that Zyriel’s academic performance is significantly below grade-level expectations: • Full Scale IQ: 67 (1st percentile) - Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence • Reading Comprehension: 71 (3rd percentile) - 2nd grade equivalency • Math Problem Solving: 62 (0.6th percentile) - 1st grade equivalency • Numerical Operations: 63 (0.7th percentile) - 1st grade equivalency • Written Expression: 48 (<0.1 percentile) - Very Low range • Listening Comprehension: 68 (2nd percentile) - Extremely Low range • Adaptive Behavior Composite: 66 (1st percentile) - Low range Despite these documented deficits, Zyriel is expected to access 6th-grade curriculum with accommodations only. Our ongoing concern is that she is being provided content that is immediately beyond her comprehension, supported through intensive teacher assistance to complete assignments, continually retaught the same material and then unable to retain or generalize this information. This does not constitute meaningful educational progress and does not provide Zyriel with a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) as required under IDEA. This educational path does not do justice to Zyriel's needs or abilities. FORMAL REQUESTS 1. Prior Written Notice (PWN) I await a Prior Written Notice documenting the decision to keep Zyriel at sixth grade standard curriculum and reasoning, reasonably by February 20, 2026. 2. Progress Monitoring Documentation I request copies of all rubrics currently being used to measure Zyriel’s progress monitoring, along with any scripts or instructional supports being utilized. The progress monitoring data appears to reflect “supported” performance rather than independent mastery. This supported data does not accurately represent what Zyriel truly knows and can do independently, which is essential information for appropriate educational planning and measuring meaningful progress toward IEP goals. 3. i-Ready Data and Analysis I was provided with i-Ready summaries during the meeting. Upon review, I have identified the following concerns: Mathematics i-Ready Data: • February 9, 2026: Zyriel spent 40 minutes on “Writing fractions greater than 1 as a mixed number” - 0/4 correct • January 29-30, 2026: Zyriel spent a combined 52 minutes on “Finding a fraction of a whole number (Parts 1 & 2)” - 2/8 correct • September 29, 2025: “Tell if a difference is less than or greater than 10 and make a 10 to subtract” - 60% after 2 attempts I do not see evidence that the program returned to reteach these skills despite inadequate mastery. This raises concerns about whether i-Ready is appropriately responsive to Zyriel’s learning needs and whether skill gaps are being systematically addressed. ELA i-Ready Data: I understood during the meeting that each lesson should require approximately 20+ minutes for adequate instruction and practice. Zyriel is spending less than 8 minutes on nearly all ELA lessons, which suggests inadequate time for meaningful learning. I request digital copies of both the Mathematics and ELA i-Ready summaries, along with an explanation of how lesson completion time and accuracy data are being used to inform instruction and determine whether skills have been mastered. 4. Math180 and Reading180 Programming The option was presented for Zyriel to participate in Math180 and Reading180 interventions; however, this would require her to forfeit both elective courses. While I recognize these may be valuable interventions given our limited options, I want it documented that requiring a student with multiple disabilities to sacrifice all enrichment, social, and creative opportunities in order to access appropriate academic instruction is inequitable and potentially restrictive. Students should not have to choose between access to grade-level peers in non-academic settings and receiving instruction at their instructional level. This is an obviously unfair option for Zyriel. 5. Current Grade Data Zyriel currently has a 70% in ELA, which the team relied upon heavily to justify continuing the 6th grade standards course of action. As I shared during our meeting, grades are not equally weighted in validity as objective, full scale neuropsychological evaluations, of which we have three. Grades can be used to supplement concrete data-based documentation, not to override it. From IDEA Section 300.101(c)(1): Each state must ensure that FAPE is available to any child with a disability who needs special education and related services even if the child has not failed, been retained, or is advancing from grade to grade. No additional data was provided during this meeting that contradicts the documented academic and adaptive deficits outlined in Zyriel’s three psycho-educational evaluations. The Written Language Evaluation completed by the school psychometrist on January 14, 2026, was consistent with all previous evaluation data, further supporting the need for significantly modified curriculum. PARENT DECISION REGARDING IEP GOAL I am requesting removal of the “homework log” goal from Zyriel’s IEP. Zyriel will not be required to complete homework that is inappropriate for her current skill level and does not align with her documented educational needs. SUMMARY The evaluation data is unequivocal: Zyriel’s cognitive abilities (1st percentile), academic achievement (ranging from <0.1 percentile to 3rd percentile in core academic areas), and adaptive functioning (1st percentile) indicate that she requires specialized instruction with modified curriculum focused on functional academics and life skills. Providing grade-level content with accommodations has not resulted in meaningful progress and does not meet the standard of FAPE. During the meeting, it was mentioned that the school “doesn’t have a Tier-3 ELA classroom.” Of course, this is not an acceptable justification under IDEA for denying appropriate services. The lack of an existing program does not negate the school district’s obligation to provide FAPE. Additionally, even if such a classroom existed, placement in a 6th-grade Tier-3 ELA classroom would be inappropriate given Zyriel’s reading comprehension at 2nd-grade equivalency. It is the district’s obligation is to provide programming appropriate to Zyriel’s documented needs. Unfortunately, I did not hear at yesterday's how the district plans to provide Zyriel with an educational program that is truly appropriate to her abilities and will result in meaningful, measurable learning that is individualized to her future goals. Please confirm receipt of this email and place a copy inside Zyriel’s IEP. Please also provide a timeline for when the requested documentation will be available.

** Trying to reply to you but may have hit the wrong button. Thank you for your response! I homeschooled her 1st - 5th. She entered 5th grade in January for spring semester. She's now been in public for 2 full semesters. 1. Both, including IEP goals. Her progress monitoring shows regression on some goals and lack of significant progress on others. However, her goals were created with the mindset of "She can reach 6th grade standards with enough support".. we're now confident we need to move the goalposts so to speak, having completed an outside educational assessment and watching her absorb nothing so far this school year. We have no data from her work, evaluations, observations, her own words.. to continue to support the thinking that she is capable of learning this level of rigor at this time. 2. No, they are not yet. I will loop them in on my IEP Meeting follow-up email. 3. Transition services are required in 9th grade or 16yrs old. She's currently 12.5 yrs old and given her FASD dx, takes several years longer than other kids to acquire skills. Her birthday, for example, we've been working on for 6 years. All that to say, 4-5 yrs of transition services will likely be insufficient time for her to acquire all the goals needed to fit her stated goal of living independently. We have been told that they cannot "go back" and teach her the 1st-2nd grade skills like time, money value, etc. because they "have to tie it to grade-level standards, anything else would be modifying the curriculum", which they don't feel is appropriate for her because she would be moved out of gen. ed. and is apparently too social to get her cognitive needs met.

Looking for input / experiences navigating IEP placement & curriculum modification: Right now it feels like we’re not speaking the same language as our school team. A bit about our sweet student: FSIQ: 66 Multiple diagnoses impacting cognitive and adaptive functioning (FASD, ASD L2, IDD) Two full educational evaluations completed (school + outside evaluator) → Results are nearly identical, indicating validity Reading comprehension: ~2nd grade equivalent Receptive & expressive vocabulary: both under the 1st percentile Numerical operations & computation: under the 1st percentile Already retained one grade (our decision, due to her disabilities) Current concerns: I first raised concerns about curriculum modification in September We now have a full semester of data showing: Even with an extensive list of accommodations, the gap between the grade-level curriculum and her actual understanding is astronomical Oh, I also homeschooled her for 5 years so I'm pretty intimately aware of her academic abilities. Lack of meaningful progress No transfer of skills ("Can do it" at school but has never been able to demonstrate a glimmer of understanding at home) No testing that demonstrates she can contextualize or apply grade-level material Relative strength in working memory (42nd percentile) Meaning she can immediately echo and imitate in the moment, but nothing is transferring to true understanding. What we’re hearing from the team: “I know what this (30-page evaluation) says, but that’s not the student we see in the classroom.” “This is absolutely not a kiddo who can’t get a standard diploma.” “She socializes with peers, a different placement would be devastating to her.” Our perspective: Her post–high school goal is to live independently someday. That’s the end target we are working toward. Right now, she is in 6th grade and: Misspells her middle name, doesn't know her birthday Does not know her address Cannot reliably read a clock Has ~1st grade number sense Struggles significantly with functional understanding We strongly feel that keeping her on curriculum that is far beyond her cognitive ability is not providing FAPE, specifically, appropriate education. Real-world examples we’ve used to explain this gap: She can read a box of mac and cheese, but doesn’t understand what any of the words mean If she’s on a public bus and needs stop 13, seeing stop 12 gives her no understanding of whether she’s one stop away or fifty If she needs to leave at 6:10 and the clock says 6:11, she will continue waiting until it shows 6:10 We fear the team is comfortable “helping her pass along,” and we’ll end up with a high schooler who still has 1st-grade daily living skills, unprepared to meet her own stated goals. We meet again in a few weeks. Thank you so much for reading and sharing your experiences.

For background: Our 6th has Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (and, therefore..) Autism L2 & a Mild Intellectual Disability (FSIQ = 66). Testing results (which have been consistent across 3 evaluations): Receptive vocabulary = 0.8th percentile, expressive vocabulary = 2nd percentile, adaptive behaviors = 1st percentile, reading comprehension = 3rd percentile, numerical operations = 0.7th percentile, math problem solving = 0.6th percentile. When she began middle school this year, we could see immediately that she was (literally) years behind in understanding or even conceptualizing the standard 6th grade curriculum. I brought my concerns to the team in Sept. and I mentioned modifying. They looked at me like I had 2 heads and said "she is not a student that would need that". One of the tricky things about FASD is that she can present quite typical and mask her significant deficits. I fully believe that's what's happening here. I've been very active in her IEP and she has dozens of thoughtful accommodations. Even so, she is consistently getting 8%, 20%, 40% on assignments across all classes. Though grades are subjective, they do accurate represent that she does not understand any of whats being taught to her. When she gets a higher grade, it is because she guessed more luckily. In math, for example, they are "supporting her in learning" in finding the area of a parallelogram. My sweet daughter cannot tell time, read a calendar, or do any basic math (+, -, x) without being told step by step how to put it into her calculator. She only memorized her birthday this year but cannot tell you what month is before or after it. When she is guided to a right answer, she cannot conceptualize in any way what it means. I have expressed that our goals for her are functional and life-related, rather than standard 6th grade curriculum. I now have an outside educational assessment that supports the need to modify her educational path, hopefully to a Mild Intellectual Disability classroom. Her current, local middle school does not have this program so it will require her to change schools and be bussed out of her zoned district. Despite all of the above, I know I will meet resistance with her IEP team in getting this change of placement. Though they seem satisfied to pass her through without her actually learning anything (and therefore, not "needing" modification), we are not satisfied with that plan. She can't learn 6th grade curriculum but she can learn something. Leaving her in Gen. Ed. wastes time that she could be working toward functional, life skills that came easily to her classmates years ago. Finally, my question. Is there anything in this scenario I'm not seeing? With the most beautiful accommodations in the world, she cannot access this material by miles. We see no other way forward but to let go of a high school diploma and change her path to a certificate / special education diploma. Thank you.

Thank you. It's helpful to be reassured that my thinking was correct on this. I will get through our outside educational assessment tomorrow before crafting a Parent Concerns Letter on the topic. In speaking with other parents in my district, I assume they will push back on giving accurate grades to my child. In that case, I believe my next step would be to request a PWN justifying that decision.