Are you a podcast fan, like me? Recently, on Clubhouse for Educational Diagnosticians, Nazzie Pater-Rov, creator and host, interviewed the authors of the CTOPP. Dr. Wagner and Dr. Torgersen shared their knowledge, current research projects and expertise on what and how we identify dyslexia. What I loved most about this episode was the perspective and first hand knowledge of how we understand and identify dyslexia has unfolded over the last 40 years.
You can find this episode and more at the following links!
You can listen to past episodes through Spotify found HERE
or download the Clubhouse ap to your phone and access them HERE
Virtual Lunch and Learn Series
The Virtual Lunch and Learn sessions will be offered from 11:30-1:30 and will cover a variety of topics critical to your success as an evaluator and will include interactive activities and group discussions. Attendees may opt to participate during the live session or asynchronously during the week following the live session.
10/9/2024-Overview of the Research and Updated Technology Behind the Cultural and Linguistic Matrix with Dr. Larry Pristo
12/11/2024- From Review to Action: Incorporating Existing Evaluation Data in Initial Assessments
2/12/2025- TBD
5/14/2025- TBD
American Sign Language Versions Now Available
SPEDTex now offers American Sign Language (ASL) translations (in video format) for two important special education documents:
ON Demand TEA Course: Admission, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) Committee Manager Training
Click HERE to register for this course.
This professional development session is a self-paced, online course that is intended to provide participants with best practices to ARD committee managers for local education agencies (LEAs) that choose to use this model. This course is intended to provide information, guidance, and best practice for successfully achieving the expectations, roles, and responsibilities of an ARD committee manager, including scheduling ARD committee meetings, preparing and finalizing required ARD committee paperwork, facilitating the ARD committee meeting, and supporting families and school personnel with the ARD committee processes. Participants who complete the course will receive 12 hours of professional learning credits.
Standards-Based Individualized Education Program (IEP) Process Training
On-Demand Standards-Based Individualized Education Program (IEP) Process Training Course
Virtual Lunch and Learn Series for ARD Managers
The Virtual Lunch and Learn sessions will be offered from 11:30-1:30 and will cover a variety of topics critical to your success as an ARD Manager and will include interactive activities and group discussions. Attendees may opt to participate during the live session or asynchronously during the week following the live session.
9/11/2024
11/13/2024
1/22/2025
4/9/2025
Dyslexia: Proposed Updates to Texas Administrative Code 74.28 and the Texas Dyslexia Handbook
The Texas Dyslexia Handbook has now been posted to the Texas Register and will go into effect on June 30, 2024.
During this quarter, the top three areas of noncompliance in special education monitoring are listed below along with suggested trainings and resources to help LEAs improve in these areas:
IEP Development
Standards-Based Individualized Education Program (SB IEP) Process Training: This training provides participants with an understanding of the SB IEP process for gathering student data, including the full and individual evaluation (FIE), to write the student’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance (PLAAFP) statement, to draft measurable annual goals with short-term objectives/benchmarks, if appropriate, and to create a data collection system for monitoring progress of the annual goals. It is available as an asynchronous online course and synchronously through each ESC. Each ESC offers coaching as well to support participants and ensure they apply the skills learned with fidelity.
Writing Effective Impact and Need Statements in the Full and Individual Evaluation: This recorded webinar provides guidance for writing effective needs statements related to the student’s disability in the initial FIE to create present level statements that lead to the development of an appropriate IEP.
A Step Toward IEP Quality and Rigor for Students with Complex Access Needs: This course is similar to the SB IEP Process training but delves deeper into topics relevant to students with complex access needs. Each ESC offers coaching as well to support participants and ensure they apply the skills learned with fidelity.
TIER Progress Monitoring Tool: The TIER Progress Monitoring Tool is a free progress monitoring platform to house data for students receiving interventions. It is intended for use with the accompanying instructional video.
Transition
Common challenges included completing the first transition ARD meeting prior to a student's 14th birthday, developing measurable post-secondary goals based upon age-appropriate transition assessments, and ensuring the IEP addresses the transfer of rights of the student no later than one year before the 18th birthday.
- Writing Appropriate Measurable Postsecondary Goals: This asynchronous online course gives Texas educators the information and tools to write appropriate measurable postsecondary goals for students with disabilities. Each ESC offers coaching as well to support participants and ensure they apply the skills learned with fidelity.
- Conducting Necessary Transition Assessments: This asynchronous online course gives educators the information and tools needed to conduct meaningful transition assessments. Each ESC offers coaching as well to support participants and ensure they apply the skills learned with fidelity.
- Notice of Transfer of Rights Model Form: This document provides a model form, information, and resources for LEAs to notify students and parents of transfer of rights, guardianship, alternatives to guardianship. This includes supported decision-making agreements as described in Chapter 1357, Estates Code, and other supports and services that may enable the student to live independently.
- Texas Transition and Employment Guide: This guide includes information on statewide services and programs that assist in the transition to life outside of the public school system.
Properly Constituted ARDs
Common challenges with included a Career and Technical Education (CTE) representative and a Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC) member in ARD committee meetings when applicable.
- Technical Assistance: Individualized Education Program Development: This guide walks readers through the process of developing an IEP that is individualized, based on the unique needs of each student, and designed to enable them to work towards grade-level content standards and achieve challenging goals. Information regarding required members of an ARD committee can be found in this guide.
- ARD 101 (update pending): This virtual workshop will review the requirements of an ARD committee meeting, including membership, participation, and components. Participants will gain an understanding of the different types of ARD committee meetings and the processes for mutual agreement. Learn best practices of a compliant ARD committee meeting and process.
- CTE and Special Education Frequently Asked Questions: This document addresses common questions received by the TEA relating to CTE and students served by special education, and includes information about ARD Committee Membership.
- ARD Committee Manager Training: An ARD committee manager is a staff member who facilitates or leads ARD committee meetings and helps meet local, state, and federal guidelines for students being considered for or receiving special education and related services. This course provides best practices for educators who may be assigned as an ARD committee manager.
8TH CIRCUIT AFFIRMS THE OSFAA
Loyal Daily Dawg Readers should, by now, be familiar with the OSFAA—the One-Size-Fits-All-Answer to questions about the content of a student’s IEP. I first introduced this term in the Daily Dawg on February 15, 2023 in the context of a case from Minnesota. Now the decision in that case has been affirmed by the 8th Circuit. So let’s review.
The case involved a 15-year old student who is non-verbal, has a significant cognitive impairment and functions in the range of an 18-month old. She has seizures continually and is particularly unable to function in the morning. Everyone agreed that her school day should start at noon but there was disagreement about when it should end. The district proposed 4.25 hours of school per day, which was less than the 6.5 offered to general students.
The district court held that the shortened day offered to this student was not “appropriately ambitious” and thus failed to satisfy the FAPE standard. The court affirmed the hearing officer’s order that the school provide instruction in the home from 4:30 to 6:00 pm.
You might think that this was a simple matter of equality. The general education students got 6.5 hours of instruction a day, and the district offered this girl only 4.25. But that was not the basis for the court’s decision. Instead, the court thoughtfully considered the reasons for the shortened day that the district offered, but noted that none of them were based on this particular student’s needs as shown by the evaluation data. In short, the district did not use the OSFAA.
What were the reasons offered by the school? The court described them as “shifting explanations” that revealed that the school prioritized its staffing schedule over the needs of the student. The school’s first explanation was: “we’ve never before provided both homebound and in-school services to a student.” This comes under the category of “we’ve never done that before.” To which the proper response is: “So?”
The second explanation was that state law did not require the district to serve the student beyond the normal school day. Maybe so. But IDEA is a federal law.
The third explanation was the district’s fear of “setting a precedent.” In other words, if we do this for this student, we will have many more similar requests. I’ve heard school officials express this fear often. But it’s mistaken. If the district had granted the parent’s request, the only “precedent” it would be setting is that it followed the data to provide what this particular student needed in order to provide FAPE. In other words, the “precedent” would be that the district complies with the law. That’s a good precedent, not a bad one. On top of that, the whole notion of “precedent” is inconsistent with the law’s emphasis on individualization.
The OSFAA is designed to focus on how and by whom decisions about IEP content should be made. Here it is:
Let me take that issue to the ARD Committee. I’ll ask the ARDC to review the evaluation data about your child. We will determine if this is something your child needs in order to receive a FAPE. If it’s needed, we will include it in the IEP.
See how that works? There are four critical components to the OSFAA: ARDC; Evaluation Data; Need; and FAPE.
I hope you can see how the OSFAA fits this situation. I’m sure the folks in Minnesota felt that they were basing their decision on the needs of the student, but the hearing officer didn’t buy it and neither did the court. The court applied the OSFAA, and concluded that the evaluation data showed that the student needed the extra hours of service in order to receive the FAPE to which she was entitled.
We bring it back up because now a higher level court has affirmed the original decision and the basis for it. In doing so, the court ratified the OSFAA without ever using that term. I guess that day will have to wait. Here’s the Key Quote:
None of the District’s explanations for refusing to provide evening instruction have ever been grounded in A.J.T.’s individual needs, as required by the IDEA.
The parents won their case under IDEA, but they reached too far when they also accused the district of disability discrimination. We’ll look at that tomorrow.
It’s Osseo Area Schools, ISD No. 279 v. A.J.T., decided by the 8th Circuit on March 21, 2024. It’s cited at 2024 WL 1204174.
DAWG BONE: OSFAA—FOUR COMPONENTS.
Got a question or comment for the Dawg? Let me hear from you at jwalsh@wabsa.com.
Amy Smith, Evaluation Consultant
Email: amy.smith@region10.org
Website: https://www.region10.org/programs/evaluation-special-education/overview/
Location: Region 10 Education Service Center, East Spring Valley Road, Richardson, TX, USA
Phone: 972-348-1784