8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 1/22 T H R E E Special Education William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 1/22
T H R E E
Special Education
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 2/22
jargon of special educationp.l. 94-I42: passed in 1975 guaranteeing every
child with a disability free and appropriateeducation now know as Individuals withDisabilities Education Act (IDEA)
504: prohibits discrimination againstpersons with disabilities in programs thatreceive federal funds
FAPE: Free, appropriate public education
IEP: Individualized education program
ARD: Admission, review, and dismissal.
Placement: This refers to the instructionalarrangement in which the child iseducated.
LRE: Least restrictive environment
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 3/22
jargon of special education
Related Services: Special transportation and
other non-instructional services thatare necessary for the child to obtainbenefit from the educationalprogram.
Eligibility: Meeting certain criteria forfederally funded special educationprograms.
FIE: Full Individual Evaluation.
IEE: Independent Educational Evaluation.
ESY: Extended School Year
OSEP: Office of Special Education Programs.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 4/22
Federal legislationChild Find
• School districts take an activerole in identifying and servingstudents with a need.
• Publicize the availability of special education services.
• Train teachers to identify thetypical signs of disability
• Reach out to private-schooladministrators and homeschoolers.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 5/22
Federal LegislationEvaluation
• To avoid untutored labeling a FullIndividual Evaluation (FIE)
• ARD committee meets in order toeliminate unnecessary testing.
• Parents have the right to disagreewith decisions if so they are entitledto obtain an IndependentEducational Evaluation but can
force the district to accept data.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 6/22
Federal LegislationEligibility
Two Requirements
1. Student must have a disability
that qualifies under the law
2. The student must as a result of
the disability need special
education services
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 7/22
Federal LegislationARD Committee
ARD Committee is composed of:1. The parent (s)
2. A regular education teacher
3. A special education teacher
4. Someone who can interpret theinstructional implications
5. A representative of the school district
6. Others in the judgment of the parents orthe school, have special knowledge or
expertise
7. When appropriate, the student
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 8/22
Federal Legislation
Individualized Education Program
• A statement of the child’s presentlevels of education
• Measurable annual goals, includingshort-term objectives
• Related services, supplemental aidsand services, program modificationsand supporters for school personnelthat provides services to the child
• Explanation for class exclusion• Modifications needed
• Dates services are provided
• Statement of how the parents will be
informed of child’s progress
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 9/22
Federal LegislationGeneral Curriculum
• Refers to the things theregular education studentsare expected to learn
• Special education studentsshould be taught as much aspossible, the same subject
matter that the regulareducation students aretaught.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 10/22
Federal LegislationNCLB and Statewide Assessments
• Require states to hold all
students to the same academic
standards, and to demonstrate
“adequate yearly progress”(AYP) through statewide test in
certain subjects.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 11/22
Federal LegislationLeast Restrictive Environment
• The law mandates that LRE,but it also mandates a fullcontinuum of alternative
placements, some of themhighly restrictive.
• Other terms Mainstreaming,
and Inclusion
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 12/22
Federal LegislationProcedural Safeguards
Four Aspects
1. Notice
2. Consent
3. The right to an IEE
4. The right to a Due ProcessMeeting
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 13/22
Federal Legislation Attorneys’ Fees
• Parents who “prevail” in a specialeducation dispute with a schooldistrict are entitled to recover
reasonable attorney fees.• Congress put some limits on
recovery of attorney fees in IDEA1997 and 2004.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 14/22
Federal Legislation FAPE
Board of Education v. Rowley
established two things
1. School districts are not required
to maximize the potential of achild but rather provide someeducational benefit to the child.
2. How courts in the future would
examine disputes under IDEA
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 15/22
Federal LegislationRelated Services
• If a student needs theservices to attend school,and the service can be
provided by someone otherthan an M.D., then theschool district must provide
or pay for the service.
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 16/22
Federal LegislationExtended School Year Services
F d l L i l ti
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 17/22
Federal LegislationUnilateral Placements
This involves a disagreement between school and parent as to the appropriate placement
.
PARENTS vs. SCHOOL -PARENTS vs. SCHOOL -
ReimbursementReimbursement
I.I. Cost ReimbursementsCost Reimbursements
What the school believes
What the parent believes
II.II. Burden of Proof - ParentBurden of Proof - Parent
Prove IEP and/or Placement recommended by school is inappropriate
Parents prove their arranged IEP and Placement are appropriate
III.III. Factors faced by - ParentFactors faced by - Parent
Law presumes program recommended by school is appropriate
Law require school to propose a program that confer (reasonable
benefit)
School proposed program will be less restrictive than the private placement
IV.IV. Teague I.S.D. v. Todd L. (1993) DeniedTeague I.S.D. v. Todd L. (1993) Denied
Reimbursement Denied
School program appropriate
Restrictive vs. Non-Restrictive
V.V. Florence County School District Four v. Carter(1994)Florence County School District Four v. Carter(1994)
Facility
Argument
U S Supreme Court Reimbursement
VI.VI. IDEAIDEA 1997 Procedural Requirements1997 Procedural Requirements
School – Line of Defense (fix problem)Parent - Procedural Requirement Notice
Private Schooling – Assemble, evaluate, devise, and determine FAPE
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 18/22
Federal LegislationPrivate-School Children IDEA 1997IDEA 1997
Under child find the public school is required to evaluate students in private school for special education.
They are also required to spend a proportionate share of federal special education funds
I.I. Public to PrivatePublic to Private
Child Find
Proportionate Share
II.II. IDEA 1997IDEA 1997FAPE
Services
No Due process
Decisions by ISDLoss of rights
III.III. TexasTexasException
Dual Enrollment
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 19/22
Discipline of Students with Disabilities
The ARD committee must review all relevant information and then answer two questions:
1. Was the conduct of the student caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial relationship to the child’s disability?2. Was the conduct of the student a direct result of the school’s failure to implement the IEP?
I.I. Congress and Special EducationCongress and Special Education
Guarantee an appropriate education
Encourage safe classrooms free drugs
II.II. S-1 v. TurlingtonS-1 v. Turlington
U.S. Court of Appeals / Fifth CircuitStudent Behavior
Students Classification
Disability or Not
III.III. Supreme Court – Honig v. DoeSupreme Court – Honig v. Doe
Dangerous Behavior
Suspension Lengths
Injunction
“Stay Put” provision of IDEAThen Current Placement
IV.IV. Congress revision of Special Education discipline laws in IDEA 1997Congress revision of Special Education discipline laws in IDEA 1997
Congress enacted into federal law a requirement
Expellable Act
Congress nullifies major court decision
V.V. Common Wealth of Virginia v. RileyCommon Wealth of Virginia v. Riley
Congress Intervention revised IDEA Nondisabled vs. Disabled
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 20/22
DISCIPLINE OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIESDISCIPLINE OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
V.V. Continued…Continued…
Exception to “stay put”
Violation to Code of Conduct
Removal longer Than 10 days
Congress adopted statutory language
Cumulative rule
VI.VI. Concept of a “ManifestationConcept of a “Manifestation
Determination”Determination”
IDEA 1997
ARD Committee
Texas Legislature – TEC §37.0021
Restraint and Time Out
Time Out
Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 21/22
Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973
I.I. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973
Federal Money
Americans with Disabilities Act
Section 504 three pronged definition
Group 1Group 2
Group 3
II.II. 504 Special Treatment504 Special Treatment
Physical or Mental Impairment
ADD
LEP
Coverage of 504
III.III. Mitigating Measures - PerformanceMitigating Measures - Performance
Medication
Non Medication
IV.IV. 504 Eligible504 Eligible
PerformancePotential
Genuine physical or mental impairment
Major life Activity
V.V. IDEA vs. 504IDEA vs. 504
Standards for eligibility
Requirements
8/14/2019 Special Education, Public School Law, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/special-education-public-school-law-dr-wa-kritsonis 22/22
William Allan Kritsonis,PhD