Talking Points for Public Forums for Article 7

Article 7 Forums will be held throughout the state over the next few weeks. These are not "formal public hearings" but, there will be an opportunity to give input and share comments that will be recorded and shared with the Division of Exceptional Learners and the State Advisory Council.

 

Family Voices Indiana is committed to ensuring that the "Family Voice" is heard during the process of Article 7 revision.  It is critical that parents attend and speak at the public forums.  If you are willing to attend and/or speak at the public forum nearest you please contact FV Indiana FVIndiana-owner@yahoogroups.com so that we can coordinate our efforts.

 

The entire proposed language for the revision of Article 7 can be found here:

http://doe.state.in.us/exceptional/advisory/Article%207%20for%20DOE%20DEL%20Website.pdf

 

State Advisory Council meeting minutes, which reflect the discussions surrounding the revisions, can be found here:

http://doe.state.in.us/exceptional/advisory/welcome.html

 

A Power point overview of proposed changes can be found here:

http://doe.state.in.us/exceptional/advisory/A7_Power_Point_Update_0807.pdf

 

Each family will bring their unique perspective and experience to this process and will want to focus on topics relevant to their specific circumstances. In an effort to support this input we are providing the following initial talking points on what we consider some of the key areas of concern to families.

 

Some possible talking points for the public forums include:

 

EARLY CHILDHOOD

 

511 IAC 7-36-5 Early childhood

New proposed language will remove the minimum number of hours, caseloads and ratios to read:

The length and frequency of the instructional day for early childhood students with disabilities shall be based on the developmental and educational needs as determined by the student's case conference committee. A public agency may not unilaterally limit the length and frequency of the instructional day based on categories of disability, age of students, or administrative convenience.

Currently, school districts are supposed to provide a minimum of 12.5 hours/wk for
full time students age 3-5. The issue of what determines "full time"
status is part if the discussion and will also be a case conference
decision. Article 7 currently states there should be no more than 10
students with disabilities per class. For a class of 1-8 children
with disabilities, there should be one teacher and one full time
aide, and a class of 9-10 should have an additional aide. It is
important to note that current ratio and class size is based only on
children with IEP's. Typically developing peers who are integral and
an important part of preschool class rooms are not factored in to
ration and staffing requirements. Since districts do not typically
provide preschool to all children, it's important to address the
inclusion of typical peers.

A parent may wish to share how ratio- class size limits and school days impact their child.

 

NON PUBLIC SCHOOLS

 

511 IAC 7-34-1 Special education and related services for parentally placed

students in nonpublic schools or facilities

IDEIA made it clear that the Local Education Agency that serves a parentally placed
private school student is the LEA where the private school is located.
This includes out-of –state private school students who attend private
schools in Indiana
IDEIA did not change parent's right to request an evaluation for
special education from their corporation of legal settlement.

Parents should understand the obligations of their local
school district as required by IDEA so they can be sure their child is
receiving services to the maximum extent allowed. A private school does not have to offer FAPE, only access to special education services.

Additional information on this complicated issue can be found at:
Question and Answer on Children placed in Private Schools by their
Parents IDEA 2004
http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/faq-parent-placed.pdf and
Students Placed in Private Schools- from NCLD
http://www.ncld.org/content/view/910/456094/

 

A family may wish to share how these changes impact their options and child's educational placement and experience.

 

511 IAC 7-40-8 Reevaluation

There is no longer a requirement to reevaluate a child every three years unless there is a specific request. This means that current IEP's may not reflect changes in the child's strengths and weaknesses. A parent would still be able to request these reevaluations, but they would not be automatically offered.

A family may wish to share how timely reevaluation has supported appropriate services for their child;discussion on how a relevant reevaluation allows for deeper understating as a child grows and moves through school.  Families may also wish to discuss the burden that is placed on families when they must seek out reevaluations instead of being reminded.

Ø  Families are encourage to inquire about the State's intentions regarding the "three year IEP"

 

Discipline

 

511 IAC 7-44-2 Disciplinary change of placement and 511 IAC 7-44-5: Manifestation determination

 

Indiana State Advisory Council has tentatively approved the new language that will allow the school to place the child in an interim alternative setting and places the burden on the parent to request expedited due process if they are in disagreement. This is allowable under IDEA because it is consistent with federal law. However, states have the option to make their laws STRONGER than IDEA. Indiana has the option to maintain the provision that decisions regarding discipline remain a case conference decision, and to maintain the 45 day calendar timeline rather than the 45 school day timeline.

Families should speak to the experience of children and families dealing with a change of placement and the burden created by requiring families to seek a due process solution instead.  They can also share how removing this decision from a case conference committee fundamentally changes how decisions are made.

 

Board of Special Education Appeals

511 IAC 7-45-9 Due process hearing appeals

This section contains the language for the Board of Special Education Appeals. The council decided to maintain the current language of a two-tiered system but will pay careful attention to public comments at the forums. Currently, a family or school wishing to appeal the due process decision of an Independent Hearing Officer (the fist
deciding party) must go before the Board of Special Education
Appeals; only after the review of the BSEA may either party proceed
to state or federal court with their appeal.
The BSEA is not a federally mandated step. In fact, the majority of
states do not require this step; instead appeals go directly to
state or federal court.

Various individuals have raised the following concerns about the two-
tiered system:
Creates an unnecessary step,
Brings additional cost to all parties,
Board members are not required to have legal training, No
qualifications are required in statute.
Board currently has ability to opt no to hear arguments
Creating a closed door/nontransparent system
Concerns about impact appeals in state or federal court because
Court will defer to the decision of the BSEA, a three-member panel
who does not attend the hearing and conducts its review without the
presence of the parties.

Additional information about the board can be found at the following:

www.doe.state.in.us/legal/appeals.html
www.dphilpotlaw.com/html/bsea.html

Families can share their thoughts on this two tier system and its implications

 

Training

511 IAC 7-35-3 Technical assistance and training

(a) Each public agency must carry out activities to ensure that public agency teachers

and administrators:

(1) are fully informed about their respective responsibilities for implementing this

article;

(2) are provided with technical assistance and training necessary to assist them in

this effort; and

(3) are provided with the necessary knowledge and skills to implement each

student's individualized education program

(b) A student's case conference committee, during the development, review, or

revision of a student's individualized education program, must consider, pursuant to

511 IAC 7-42-4(g)(2), whether technical assistance and training are necessary to

provide public agency personnel with the knowledge and skills necessary to

implement the student's individualized education program.

(c) If the case conference committee determines that technical assistance and

training are necessary under subsection (b), the case conference committee must

document:

(1) the types of technical assistance and training that will be provided; and

(2) the intended outcomes of the technical assistance and training. Intended outcomes can be related to public agency personnel, the student, or both.

Families may wish to advocate that ALL personnel, including bus drivers, cafeteria workers, etc are adequately trained in a child's unique needs.

(Message over 64k, truncated.)