I was about to conquer the world but then I got distracted by something shiny.
Post by charliegirl on Jan 6, 2007 19:48:24 GMT -5
This is just a portion of an article I found very interesting. You can find the entire article at:
www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/add_adhd/ael_legal.html
Suspending and expelling disabled children. Schools that suspend or expel students with ADHD for more than 10 days for behavior associated with their disability, or stop education services during any suspension or expulsion, may be putting their LEAs and SEAs at risk of litigation for failure to provide an appropriate public education. This is important information for school disciplinary officers, since children with ADHD frequently exhibit disruptive, oppositional, or defiant behavior, and have been found to have high rates of suspension and expulsion.
The U. S. Supreme Court, in Honig v. Doe, ruled that IDEA prohibits state or local authorities from excluding disabled children from the classroom for disruptive or even dangerous behavior associated with their disabilities. In this ruling, the Court supported Congress's intent "to strip schools of the authority to disclude disabled students," particularly students who are emotionally disturbed.5
Schools do have some recourse in serious cases: they may suspend disabled students for up to 10 days, during which time they may begin a review of the child's IEP, try to persuade parents to accept a temporary, alternative placement in the least restrictive environment, or appeal to the courts to remove a dangerous child from the school. However, exclusion of a child from class for more than 10 days is considered a change of placement and cannot occur until a determination is made as to whether the child's behavior is related to the disability.
If the misconduct is related to the disability, the child cannot be suspended for more than 10 days, but a review and a change of placement can be made and implemented in an alternate, least restrictive environment, according to procedural safeguards. If the misconduct is determined not to be related to the disability, the child can receive the school's usual disciplinary measures. However, if the parents disagree with that determination and request a due process hearing, the child must remain in the current placement, with suspension or expulsion delayed, until hearings are completed. In any case, educational services must not be stopped for disabled children during suspension or expulsion, whether or not the cause for discipline is related to the disability (U. S. Department of Education, OSEP, letter, July 14, 1993).
The Office of Special Education Programs in the U. S. Department of Education has alerted schools that "repeated discipline problems may indicate that the services being provided to a particular child should be reviewed or changed," and suggests that in school techniques be included in the IEP to address behavior related to the disability.5 A separate disciplinary or behavior plan in the IEP or Section 504 plan can make life easier for both the student with ADHD-associated behavior problems and the school. An effective plan should stress prevention and include alternatives to out-of-school suspension and expulsion. For instance, an analysis of a child's behavior pattern might show that most incidents occur during unstructured school time, such as recess, changing classes, assemblies, or lunch. Preventative strategies in this case might include assigning constructive activities to keep the child busy and occupied, such as lunchroom responsibilities or office work; seating the child near the teacher during assemblies; or escorting the child to classes. Closer monitoring of the child during free time may be needed, accompanied by frequent positive feedback for acceptable behavior. Alternatives to out-of-school suspension might include after-school detention, community service, or service to the school.
Because children with ADHD are generally unresponsive to reinforcements and punishment, consequences for unacceptable behavior need to be immediate, related to the offense, and nonpunitive. Also, since children with ADHD are unable to generalize behavior learned in one situation to other situations, the IEP should target specific behaviors for the particular situations the child encounters during the school day.
Children with ADHD need to be taught that they are accountable for their behavior, but punishment for behavior beyond the child's control is both unhelpful and inappropriate. As Accardo15 says so well:
The first thing to accept about a child who has ADHD is that this child's brain functions differently. We won't be able to change how the brain functions, so we must modify our expectations. This does not mean lowering expectations; it does mean making allowances.
Following procedures. IDEA is heavily procedural and includes safeguards to ensure parental participation. School districts must provide written notice to parents before identifying, evaluating, or placing children, or changing an identification, evaluation, or placement. Similar notice must accompany any change in the provision of an appropriate public education for a child. Both parents and schools can initiate due process to evaluate differences in evaluation or placement. The failure of an education agency to follow the procedures set forth in IDEA, such as parent notification or due process, is sufficient reason to rule that a disabled child has been denied an appropriate public education.5
QUESTIONS POLICYMAKERS NEED TO ASK
ABOUT PROVIDING SERVICES TO STUDENTS WITH ADHD
What evidence exists that...
* all school districts within the state locate and provide special education or Section 504 services for eligible children?
* teacher and staff know how to identify, evaluate, and provide an appropriate education and/or educational adaptations for eligible children with ADHD?
* that state's schools of education address the needs of disabled students in the feneral education curriculum, so that all future teachers know how to teach all students?
* regular classroom teachers who have students with ADHD have adequate classroom support, such as classroom aides, lower pupil-teacher ratios, and resources to help them meet special education needs?
* regular and special education programs are coordinated to provide a continuum of services for students and support for teachers?
* the state plan for educating the disabled students with the ADHD is working, indicated by improved academic achievement; lower dropout, suspension, and explusion rates; and fewer legal complaints?
. Summary
Because state education agencies are responsible for overseeing IDEA and Section 504 in the state's schools, and actually providing free appropriate education if local education agencies fail to do so, a state's education policymakers have a clear mandate to formulate policy and develop a state plan for educating disabled students. To prevent both school failure for children with ADHD and unnecessary lawsuits, they additionally must be sure the policy and plan are known and implemented in the state's schools.
Link to Post - Back to Top 24.53.253.199
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
misty
member is online
The only blind person at Chrismastime is he who has not Christmas in his heart"- H. Keller
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,588
Re: Suspending and expelling disabled children
« Reply #1 on Apr 5, 2006, 12:05am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:The first thing to accept about a child who has ADHD is that this child's brain functions differently. We won't be able to change how the brain functions, so we must modify our expectations. This does not mean lowering expectations; it does mean making allowances
Thats the part I WISH we could get through the heads of teachers! They learn DIFFERENTLY!
www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/add_adhd/ael_legal.html
Suspending and expelling disabled children. Schools that suspend or expel students with ADHD for more than 10 days for behavior associated with their disability, or stop education services during any suspension or expulsion, may be putting their LEAs and SEAs at risk of litigation for failure to provide an appropriate public education. This is important information for school disciplinary officers, since children with ADHD frequently exhibit disruptive, oppositional, or defiant behavior, and have been found to have high rates of suspension and expulsion.
The U. S. Supreme Court, in Honig v. Doe, ruled that IDEA prohibits state or local authorities from excluding disabled children from the classroom for disruptive or even dangerous behavior associated with their disabilities. In this ruling, the Court supported Congress's intent "to strip schools of the authority to disclude disabled students," particularly students who are emotionally disturbed.5
Schools do have some recourse in serious cases: they may suspend disabled students for up to 10 days, during which time they may begin a review of the child's IEP, try to persuade parents to accept a temporary, alternative placement in the least restrictive environment, or appeal to the courts to remove a dangerous child from the school. However, exclusion of a child from class for more than 10 days is considered a change of placement and cannot occur until a determination is made as to whether the child's behavior is related to the disability.
If the misconduct is related to the disability, the child cannot be suspended for more than 10 days, but a review and a change of placement can be made and implemented in an alternate, least restrictive environment, according to procedural safeguards. If the misconduct is determined not to be related to the disability, the child can receive the school's usual disciplinary measures. However, if the parents disagree with that determination and request a due process hearing, the child must remain in the current placement, with suspension or expulsion delayed, until hearings are completed. In any case, educational services must not be stopped for disabled children during suspension or expulsion, whether or not the cause for discipline is related to the disability (U. S. Department of Education, OSEP, letter, July 14, 1993).
The Office of Special Education Programs in the U. S. Department of Education has alerted schools that "repeated discipline problems may indicate that the services being provided to a particular child should be reviewed or changed," and suggests that in school techniques be included in the IEP to address behavior related to the disability.5 A separate disciplinary or behavior plan in the IEP or Section 504 plan can make life easier for both the student with ADHD-associated behavior problems and the school. An effective plan should stress prevention and include alternatives to out-of-school suspension and expulsion. For instance, an analysis of a child's behavior pattern might show that most incidents occur during unstructured school time, such as recess, changing classes, assemblies, or lunch. Preventative strategies in this case might include assigning constructive activities to keep the child busy and occupied, such as lunchroom responsibilities or office work; seating the child near the teacher during assemblies; or escorting the child to classes. Closer monitoring of the child during free time may be needed, accompanied by frequent positive feedback for acceptable behavior. Alternatives to out-of-school suspension might include after-school detention, community service, or service to the school.
Because children with ADHD are generally unresponsive to reinforcements and punishment, consequences for unacceptable behavior need to be immediate, related to the offense, and nonpunitive. Also, since children with ADHD are unable to generalize behavior learned in one situation to other situations, the IEP should target specific behaviors for the particular situations the child encounters during the school day.
Children with ADHD need to be taught that they are accountable for their behavior, but punishment for behavior beyond the child's control is both unhelpful and inappropriate. As Accardo15 says so well:
The first thing to accept about a child who has ADHD is that this child's brain functions differently. We won't be able to change how the brain functions, so we must modify our expectations. This does not mean lowering expectations; it does mean making allowances.
Following procedures. IDEA is heavily procedural and includes safeguards to ensure parental participation. School districts must provide written notice to parents before identifying, evaluating, or placing children, or changing an identification, evaluation, or placement. Similar notice must accompany any change in the provision of an appropriate public education for a child. Both parents and schools can initiate due process to evaluate differences in evaluation or placement. The failure of an education agency to follow the procedures set forth in IDEA, such as parent notification or due process, is sufficient reason to rule that a disabled child has been denied an appropriate public education.5
QUESTIONS POLICYMAKERS NEED TO ASK
ABOUT PROVIDING SERVICES TO STUDENTS WITH ADHD
What evidence exists that...
* all school districts within the state locate and provide special education or Section 504 services for eligible children?
* teacher and staff know how to identify, evaluate, and provide an appropriate education and/or educational adaptations for eligible children with ADHD?
* that state's schools of education address the needs of disabled students in the feneral education curriculum, so that all future teachers know how to teach all students?
* regular classroom teachers who have students with ADHD have adequate classroom support, such as classroom aides, lower pupil-teacher ratios, and resources to help them meet special education needs?
* regular and special education programs are coordinated to provide a continuum of services for students and support for teachers?
* the state plan for educating the disabled students with the ADHD is working, indicated by improved academic achievement; lower dropout, suspension, and explusion rates; and fewer legal complaints?
. Summary
Because state education agencies are responsible for overseeing IDEA and Section 504 in the state's schools, and actually providing free appropriate education if local education agencies fail to do so, a state's education policymakers have a clear mandate to formulate policy and develop a state plan for educating disabled students. To prevent both school failure for children with ADHD and unnecessary lawsuits, they additionally must be sure the policy and plan are known and implemented in the state's schools.
Link to Post - Back to Top 24.53.253.199
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
misty
member is online
The only blind person at Chrismastime is he who has not Christmas in his heart"- H. Keller
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,588
Re: Suspending and expelling disabled children
« Reply #1 on Apr 5, 2006, 12:05am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:The first thing to accept about a child who has ADHD is that this child's brain functions differently. We won't be able to change how the brain functions, so we must modify our expectations. This does not mean lowering expectations; it does mean making allowances
Thats the part I WISH we could get through the heads of teachers! They learn DIFFERENTLY!
