WASHINGTON, DC (October 10, 2007) -- By a vote of 4-4, the Supreme Court today upheld the Second Circuit Court decision in the case of Board of Education of City of New York v. Tom F., 06-637, thereby affirming parents' statutory right to challenge a school district's Individualized Education Plan (IEP) without first “trying out” the school district's proposed placement. The New York City Department of Education had argued that even if the child's IEP is demonstrably inappropriate, a parent should not have standing to challenge their child's IEP unless the parent has first “tried out” the school district's IEP.
This is a good call for parents and kids with Asperger's or Autism who often are forced to endure months of poor IEP plans, even though it is obvious that a school is just wasting time. The argument that "gee you haven't given this plan a chance" seems absurd to psychologists and parents who know the child and have a reasonable idea of what will work and what won't.
I'm still puzzled, though, why schools can't write more thought out IEP's with clear goals and objectives and with clear ways to measure success or failure. I have talked before about using Behavioral Tests (BAT's ) as independent tests of the success of an intervention. I've sat at school meetings and urged IEP committees to adopt more scientific approaches to planning, mostly for naught. What's funny is that it's not hard to do and it would certainly keep districts from getting sued (and they'd be helping the child with AS at the same time).
And so it goes. The original IEP generation is grown up. How are colleges handling all these students who now want to attend college? There are some positive stories here at Keene State College and other places, such as Boston University or St. Norbert's College, but I get calls all the time from parents seeking places that will understand their kid.
From E-speaks today:
WASHINGTON, DC (October 10, 2007) -- By a vote of 4-4, the Supreme Court today upheld the Second Circuit Court decision in the case of Board of Education of City of New York v. Tom F., 06-637, thereby affirming parents' statutory right to challenge a school district's Individualized Education Plan (IEP) without first “trying out” the school district's proposed placement. The New York City Department of Education had argued that even if the child's IEP is demonstrably inappropriate, a parent should not have standing to challenge their child's IEP unless the parent has first “tried out” the school district's IEP.
This is a good call for parents and kids with Asperger's or Autism who often are forced to endure months of poor IEP plans, even though it is obvious that a school is just wasting time. The argument that "gee you haven't given this plan a chance" seems absurd to psychologists and parents who know the child and have a reasonable idea of what will work and what won't.
I'm still puzzled, though, why schools can't write more thought out IEP's with clear goals and objectives and with clear ways to measure success or failure. I have talked before about using Behavioral Tests (BAT's ) as independent tests of the success of an intervention. I've sat at school meetings and urged IEP committees to adopt more scientific approaches to planning, mostly for naught. What's funny is that it's not hard to do and it would certainly keep districts from getting sued (and they'd be helping the child with AS at the same time).
And so it goes. The original IEP generation is grown up. How are colleges handling all these students who now want to attend college? There are some positive stories here at Keene State College and other places, such as Boston University or St. Norbert's College, but I get calls all the time from parents seeking places that will understand their kid.