5 Tips for a Better Transition Plan for Life After High School

Students with Down syndrome face many barriers to success after school. Too many fall off “the cliff” when they leave high school, with no village to catch them. With courts continuing to hold a low bar for school districts implementing transition services, it’s no wonder that unemployment for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) sits at 80%. Still, there are steps you can take to ensure your loved one gets the services and supports he needs to be successful in the real world.

Transition services start when your child turns 16-years-old. The IEP transition goals must be updated annually and include measurable goals. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) defines these services as an outcome-oriented process that “promotes movement from school to post-school activities” like college, vocational training, integrated employment, independent living, and community participation. IDEA says transition services must be based on each student’s needs, and consider their preferences and interests.

Read Related Post: What College Should Look Like for Students with Down Syndrome

The problem is most of the case law surrounding transition services have created low expectations. I recently learned about this case law during a Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates webinar on transition services. Overall, Circuit Courts have established three barriers to IEP transition services for student with disabilities:

  1. Courts have ruled the IEP transition process is procedural vs. substantive. This means if a parent brings a transition violation to court, most have ruled that it was just a procedural mistake and not a denial of a free and appropriate education (FAPE). There are few consequences for the violating school (Klein Independent School District v. Hovem, 5th Circuit 2012).
  2. Judges historically have looked at the IEP as a whole, instead of transition services specifically. If the judge believes the IEP overall has provided some benefit, then there’s no violation of FAPE if the transition services were not fully met (Lessard v. Wilton Lyndeborough Coop. Sch. Dist. 1st Circuit 2008).
  3. Courts have also diminished the value of transition service requirements, especially for students interested in college. Some cases have even inadvertently punished parents who advocate for college, by ruling that other services like vocational options and practical living skills don’t then have to be fulfilled in the transition plan (Coleman v. Pottstown Sch. Dist. ED.Pa 2013) (Sinan L. v. School District of Philadelphia, 3rd Cir. 2008).

Sometimes we have to evaluate how bad things are to understand how to make them better. Even though the case law surrounding transition is grim, there’s still a lot we can do to help prepare our loved ones for life after high school.

Tips for a Better Transition Plan for Students with Disabilities:

  1. Get a thorough transition assessment: The only place where case law seems bright is in the area of assessments. When courts looked at cases where there was either no transition assessment or a poor one, parents prevailed (Carrie I. ex re. Greg I. v. Dep’t of Educ, Hawaii 2012) (Gibson v. Forest Hills Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. 2013) (Dracut Sch. Comm. v. Bureau of Special Educ. 2010). Push your school district to complete a thorough transition assessment. It’s the only way to come up with meaningful, measurable IEP transition goals.
  2. Use the general education curriculum as a guide: IDEA requires, from its very first paragraph, that students with disabilities access general education curriculum. The Common Core has a lot of standards that are important to all students post-high school. The Free and Appropriate Education (FAPE) clause also requires an education that relates to state learning standards. Almost all states require standards that include career and college preparation (i.e. personal finance, time management, developing and action plan, diet and nutrition, home safety, etc). Look at these standards for all students in your state, and request that your student with ID also work on these important goals.
  3. Use Section 504: This civil rights law allows all students with disabilities to access the same activities as typical students. School clubs and after-school activities all provide direct experience for future careers, social interaction, self-advocacy, and leadership. Students with disabilities are often not selected for these clubs and extracurricular activities. You should work with your child’s IEP team to get them accommodations and modifications to participate in these clubs. It’s their right to participate, and it will provide an invaluable experience.
  4. Use the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): According to this new federal education law, students with disabilities can still work towards a regular diploma, even if they are taking alternate assessments. Disability advocates worked tirelessly to get this provision in the law, because it’s so important to our loved ones’ futures. Let’s face it, most employers won’t even look at a candidate if they don’t have a high school diploma. It’s important that students with Down syndrome strive for a regular diploma, even if we’re unsure if they can obtain it. We never know unless they try, and it can help push expectations higher on transition goals.
  5. Use Endrew F. Supreme Court Case: It will be interesting to see new cases about transition violations moving forward in light of the Endrew F. Supreme Court Case. The justices in Endrew F. unanimously ruled that students with disabilities deserve a more meaningful benefit. It seems this new ruling could change how courts look at progress on transition goals. I also love Chief Justice Roberts quote during the hearing: “the IEP is not a form.” Parents can now ague that transition goals and services should be meaningful and progress should be checked often.

Click here and here for examples of good transition goals.  

Read Related Post: Realizing the Promise of the Endrew Supreme Court Case

Understanding the roadblocks at IEP transition meetings will help you prepare to break them down. Demand that your child’s IEP transition goals be concrete and have detailed data collection. There’s no way to know if goals and services are working without data collection and progress monitoring.

Research shows that students transitioning from school need IEP transition goals that look ahead. Experts say you should get rid of any goals a student has failed to accomplish in the last decade (i.e. identifying letters), and instead focus on specific goals that will help them adapt to the real world. Still, students don’t have to choose between academic and life skills. Push outside agencies to do life skills while still working on academics in school. After all you can’t understand how to navigate in the real world, unless you have experience out in it.

What does your child’s IEP Transition plan look like? What roadblocks have you faced to post-secondary success? Share your story below.

 

Making SMARTER IEP Goals with an Inclusive Mindset

How do we get our loved ones with Down syndrome included in regular education classrooms with proper supports? For most, it’s an elusive question. But it all really starts with IEP Goals.

A good evaluation drives good IEP goals, which can drive placement in regular education with proper supports. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) actually mandates specific requirements for IEP goals, but often even school personnel don’t know about these requirements. It may be up to you to advocate for more evidence-based, inclusive-driven IEP goals for your child.

Read Related Post Here: 3 Words that Will Transform Your Child’s Next IEP Meeting

Two Speech and Language Pathologists are using their combined 40 years experience at the IEP table to help parents and teachers write better IEP Goals. You may have heard of SMART Goals, which is an acronym created by a group of entrepreneurs and used in many industries. Although the acronym is helpful to the IEP goal writing process, Lara Wakefield and Kelly Ott say it needed to be expanded to include IDEA mandates. Keep reading to find out how they improved one of my son’s IEP goals using the expanded acronym: SMARTER.

“If we write SMARTER IEP Goals we have better outcomes. The entire IEP process and the student’s education depends on solidly written IEP goals. This includes driving placement to a more inclusive setting,” explains Lara Wakefield.

Overview of the SMARTER acronym:

  1. Specific Skill sets and observable behaviors; Use specific actions words and contexts
  2. Measurable with meaningful and manageable data collection, including baselines
  3. Attainable with an annual IEP cycle
  4. Research/evidence-based methods are documented in the goal
  5. Teachable with cues and strategies that are explained in the goal
  6. Evaluate the data and communicate it regularly to parents
  7. Relevant to the general education curriculum by citing State Standards or Common Core Standards

Read Related Post Here: 7 Research Studies You Can Use at Your Child’s Next IEP Meeting to Win the Fight for Inclusion

Lara says every part of the SMARTER acronym and the federal mandates for IEP goals back up inclusion. “If the goal is supposed to be relevant to the general education curriculum, than what better place to carry out specific skill sets than in the general education classroom. Make sure that’s in your child’s IEP goal,” says Lara. Click on the link above and you will learn that every research study since IDEA was written in the 1970s, shows a regular education setting is more beneficial than a segregated setting; even for students with the most significant disabilities.

Be careful! IEP teams who leave out the evaluation and communication of data could actually lead to a more segregated setting. “If the team has goals that don’t include meaningful and manageable data collection that they evaluate and then communicate to you, they could come back and say your child hasn’t made progress. Often they will recommend a more segregated setting to help your child make progress without proving it with meaningful data. Parents should question this approach and ask ‘where’s the data?’,” Lara explains.

I gave Lara a copy of one of my son’s IEP goals that had fallen into contention. I argued to the IEP team that the goal had still not been addressed six months after the IEP was written. When I called for an IEP meeting to review data for the goal it was apparent the goal had indeed not been addressed. I argued for more time in the classroom with a collaborative effort between the SLP and teacher, and got it. Lara said the goal left out how and when data would be collected and analyzed.

 

You can find Lara Wakefield and Kelly Ott’s step-by-step book to SMARTER IEP goals below. Visit their website here. Does your child’s IEP goals include how and when data will be collected? Is this data communicated to you? Comment below.

How School Boards are Using Endrew F. Supreme Court Case Against Students with Down Syndrome

A recent U.S. Supreme Court case that was meant to be a watershed moment for the Down syndrome community and all students with disabilities, has quickly turned into yet another way to try and segregate our children.

The Endrew F. can be compared to the Brown v. Board of Education ruling for African American students. In Endrew F., The Supreme Court unanimously ruled schools must be held to a “markedly more demanding” standard when educating students with disabilities. But school boards are using the high court case to make an argument for continued segregation of students with the most significant disabilities.

Read Related Post Here: Realizing the Promise of the Endrew Supreme Court Case

It’s been 10 months since the Supreme Court created a new standard that requires special education students to meet academic standards and advance grade to grade. In that short time two cases revolving around the segregation of students with Down syndrome have put in question the promise of Endrew F.

As these two cases advance to the Ninth and Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the question will be: How will the courts interpret Endrew F. for students with intellectual disabilities? Can these students only receive “more meaningful benefit” in a self-contained class?

Read Related Post Here: 7 Research Studies You Can Use at Your Child’s Next IEP Meeting to Win the Fight for Inclusion

If you’ve read this blog before, or have any knowledge of inclusion for students with Down syndrome, you know there’s NO research that shows more academic benefit for students with the most significant disabilities in self-contained classrooms.  In fact, every research study done since the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act first became law in 1975, shows the regular classroom with proper supports provides all students with the best outcomes.

In both of the current cases at the federal appellate court level, R.M. v. Gilbert Unified School District and L.H. v. Hamilton County Department of Education, the parents and their supporters (COPAA, NDSC, NDSS, and other disability rights organizations) argue the boys with Down syndrome are in fact making progress in the regular classroom. You can read more about the cases below.

Read Related Post Here: L.H. v. Hamilton County Department of Education and R.M. v. Gilbert Unified School District

But the National School Boards Associations filed an amicus brief against the boys, and in favor of the school districts that want to segregate them. The organization that supports more than 90,000 school board members argues “academic benefit is the key factor for a court determining whether a school district has provided services in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).” The organization believes Endrew F. strengthened the importance of the educational benefit factor in LRE determinations. They stressed that school personnel are the experts when deciding if progress has been made and if placement should change, and courts shouldn’t “second guess” this judgement.

Read the National School Boards Association amicus brief for the R.M. Gilbert Unified School District here and for the L.H. v. Hamilton County Department of Education case here

Special Education Attorney and Professor, Susan Marks, is troubled by the National School Boards Association interpretation of the ruling. “They are essentially using Endrew F. as justification for trumping the LRE if a school team believes that a student would have greater academic progress in a separate program. Another troubling issue with the National School Board’s reasoning is their assertion that courts should give deference to the school professionals in making such determinations. However, we know that the IDEA gives parents a substantial role in developing their child’s program,” Susan Marks explains.

Special Education Advocates and Attorneys agree if the courts accept this troubling interpretation of Endrew F., parents will find it increasingly more difficult to access an inclusive placement. Still, many are confident the boys with Down syndrome in this case will prevail, because of the evidence that they made meaningful progress in regular education.

What do you think about these cases? Who do you think will prevail and why? Why are we still fighting for inclusion of students with the most significant disabilities? Tell me what you think below.

 

 

How a Tennessee Boy with Down Syndrome’s Family Fought School Segregation and Won

Deborah Duncan Rausch says it took countless sleepless nights researching and even selling her home to fight her son, Luka’s, public school district and win. She doesn’t want any other family to have to do the same just to get their child included.

Deborah with her son, Luka

Deborah says it started in their hometown of Knoxville, Tennessee when she realized starting in preschool Luka would be segregated from his peers and set on a non-academic path to nowhere. The family moved to Hamilton County to a magnet school in Chattanooga that initially accepted Luka with open arms. But starting in 3rd grade, as high stakes state testing began, the school started pushing for a segregated setting even though Luka was making progress.

The district wanted to place Luka for half his day in a self-contained classroom in a school outside of his neighborhood. “The segregated class follows no state curriculum or standards. There’s no homework or grades. No accountability,” Deborah explains.

Read Related Post Here: Ninth Circuit Court to Decide if Student with Down Syndrome Can Stay in General Education Classroom

Deborah pushed back and started advocating for other families facing the same prejudice in her school district. “It was so important to me because I knew it was endemic. They were trying to segregate my son as a 9-year-old. It was worth selling my house to pay the $75,000 in legal fees to force the school district to follow federal law. But what about the families that can’t?” Deborah asks.

Knowing Luka would not receive a Free and Appropriate Education in the Least Restrictive Environment if he stayed, Deborah moved her son to a Montessori School where he continues to attend today. After a five year battle with the school district, the family eventually prevailed at the district court level in Tennessee. The District Court ruled that a self-contained class is more restrictive than necessary, but that the family would not receive reimbursement for the private Montessori School.

She didn’t stop there. “I’m in finance, so I know you have to follow the money,” says Deborah. She started digging deep, making numerous Freedom of Information requests, and soon uncovered an incentived funding formula that keeps students with disabilities in her county in a cycle of segregation. “Our district’s formula pays more in segregated setting receiving the exact same level of service, than if they were in regular setting. We filed suit against Tennessee’s Department of Education for violating their fudiciary duties. They quickly settled with us, because they knew we were right,” Deborah explains.

“We can’t go any place in our town without parents coming up to us and thanking us for what we did. They say they felt helpless,” Deborah describes.

Read Related Post Here: 7 Research Studies You Can Use at Your Child’s Next IEP Meeting to Win the Fight for Inclusion

The family’s battle for inclusion is still not over. Hamilton County Schools actually filed an appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court of Federal Appeals. “They have no ground to land on, but it allows them to delay reimbursement of our legal fees. They just look vindictive and have spent a lot of taxpayer money just to violate the law. We finally decided to cross appeal for reimbursement of the Montessori school private tuition,” Deborah explains.

12-year-old Luka

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that families can be reimbursed for private school tuition if the public school IEP was found to be inappropriate, and the if the private school placement is deemed to be the most appropriate available option (School Committee of the Town of Burlington v.Department of Education of Massachusetts). “The District Judge even stated Luka made progress at the Montessori School, and he ruled the public school was inappropriate. I think he knew there was a clear violation, but just didn’t want to penalize the school district by making them pay for the private school tuition,” Deborah explains.

Even after all of the family’s success, Deborah would never recommend suing. “I would recommend learning everything you can about your child’s rights. Get connected to a local advocacy agency. No parents should go into an IEP meeting alone. Always have an advocate with you. Schools will negotiate if pushed. Fewer district will go as far to segregate as ours did,” Deborah says.

“And If you don’t care at all about disabilities, care about the the cost of taking parents to court. We could be pushing a million dollars for my son’s case, and not a single student has been educated with that money. That money should have been spent on training teachers, co-teachers, advocacy training for parents. Everyone should be outraged by that.”

A ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court for L.H. v. Department of Education of Hamilton County could take months or even a year. I will keep you posted on any updates about the case.

Have you or someone you know had to fight a similar battle for inclusion? Are you frustrated that we’re still fighting this fight more than 30 years after the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was passed? Tell me about it below.

 

 

 

Inclusion Evolution’s Top 5 Posts of 2017

This blog started as a research project into how to include my son in kindergarten and beyond. In seven short months I’ve learned so much, and I hope you have too. I appreciate your readership, and as I look back on the top posts of this past half year I realize what’s important to you.

Inclusion in school tops the list, which is good because that’s where I want my focus to be in 2018. As part of the Special Education Advocacy Training course I’m taking through the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, I hope to document what I learn and in turn help my readers on their journey to inclusion too.

Thank you so much for following along on our journey! I appreciate all of you!

 

Inclusion Evolution’s Top 5 Posts of 2017

  1. 7 Research Studies You Can Use At Your Child’s Next IEP Meeting To Win the Fight for Inclusion

  2. Federal Appeals Court to Decide If Student with Down Syndrome Can Stay in General Classroom

  3. 5 Tips for Including Students with Down Syndrome in a General Classroom

  4. Teaching Your Child with Down Syndrome to Read

  5. Why Your Child Needs a “No Consent” Letter for Restraint and Seclusion

What was your favorite post of 2017? What would you like me to cover in the new year? Let me know in the comments below.