Special Education Law, Policies and Procedures (D754)

Explanation:

Three-year reevaluations, required under IDEA, are designed to determine whether a student continues to qualify for special education services and to assess any changes in their educational needs. This comprehensive evaluation examines multiple areas, including academic, functional, and developmental performance, to inform the IEP team’s decisions about ongoing services and supports. Option A correctly reflects the purpose of these reevaluations as a legally mandated review of eligibility and current needs, rather than an optional assessment or a narrow focus on academics.

Correct Answer:

Three-year reevaluations assess whether a student continues to meet the eligibility criteria for special education services under IDEA.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

B. Three-year reevaluations are optional and can be waived by the parent if they believe their child's needs have not changed. This is incorrect because three-year reevaluations are mandatory under IDEA and cannot be waived solely based on parental belief; they ensure the student’s continued eligibility and appropriateness of services.

C. Three-year reevaluations are conducted to determine if a student's exceptionality has been completely cured since the initial evaluation. This is wrong because the purpose of reevaluations is not to determine if a disability has been “cured,” but to assess ongoing needs and eligibility for services. Disabilities may persist, and the focus is on educational planning rather than curing.

D. Three-year reevaluations focus solely on academic assessments to determine if a student has improved in specific subjects. This is incorrect because reevaluations are comprehensive, covering academic, functional, and developmental domains, not limited to subject-specific academic assessments.

Explanation:

Under IDEA, a "child with a disability" is defined as a child who has been evaluated and identified with one or more disabilities listed in the law, and whose disability results in insufficient progress in the general education curriculum and necessitates specialized instruction and related services. This definition ensures that the child’s needs go beyond typical academic challenges and require formal interventions through an Individualized Education Program (IEP). It emphasizes both the presence of a recognized disability and the impact of that disability on educational performance, ensuring that only children who require specialized instruction receive services under IDEA.

Correct Answer:

A child who has been evaluated and identified with one or more IDEA disabilities, which causes lack of progress in the general education curriculum and requires special education and related services.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

A child who struggles academically due to socioeconomic factors is incorrect because academic challenges alone, without an identified disability, do not meet IDEA criteria. Socioeconomic factors are not considered disabilities under the law.

A child who performs well academically but has behavioral issues is incorrect because behavioral issues alone do not qualify a child under IDEA unless they are linked to a recognized disability that impacts educational progress.

A child who requires only minor classroom accommodations without the need for an individualized education program (IEP) is incorrect because IDEA eligibility requires that the child’s disability necessitates special education and related services, not just minor adjustments or general classroom accommodations.

Explanation:

The special education teacher on the MDT provides expert insights into the student’s thinking, behavior, and feelings. This role involves evaluating how the student processes information, reacts in different learning environments, and responds to instructional strategies. Their knowledge is critical for designing individualized education plans (IEPs) that address both academic and behavioral needs, ensuring that interventions are tailored to the student’s unique profile. This perspective complements input from other team members, creating a comprehensive understanding of the student.

Correct Answer:

Giving expert insights into the student's thinking, behavior, and feelings

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Assessing and providing feedback on the student's communication skills is incorrect because this responsibility is typically within the domain of a speech-language pathologist or communication specialist, not the general role of the special education teacher.

Offering information about standards and expectations for the grade level is incorrect because this is primarily the responsibility of the general education teacher. While the special education teacher may be aware of curriculum goals, they focus on individualized instruction rather than general standards.

Watching for bias that may affect assessments and answering parents' questions is incorrect because this role is typically associated with the school psychologist or another assessment specialist. The special education teacher focuses on interpreting student performance and planning interventions rather than overseeing assessment fairness.

Explanation:

A student may fail to meet the criteria for an SLD if their academic difficulties are primarily due to another disability, rather than a specific learning disability. In this case, severe Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) can account for difficulties in reading and writing, meaning the academic challenges are better attributed to ASD rather than an SLD. Option D correctly describes a scenario where SLD criteria would not be met because another disability explains the learning difficulties.

Correct Answer:

A student has difficulty reading and writing but has severe Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

A. A student has poor reading comprehension but also struggles to form meaningful friendships. This is incorrect because the social difficulties do not exclude the student from SLD eligibility if the academic difficulties meet the criteria for a learning disability.

B. A student enjoys reading but performs significantly below average in reading comprehension. This is wrong because enjoying reading does not prevent identification of an SLD; significant underperformance in reading comprehension is consistent with SLD criteria.

C. A student has above average mathematical reasoning but performs poorly in reading comprehension. This is incorrect because SLD can affect specific academic areas, and strengths in one domain (math) do not prevent eligibility for reading-related SLD.

Explanation:

A key procedural safeguard under IDEA requires that parents be given notice and an opportunity to participate in any decision regarding a change in their child’s placement. The law mandates that changes in placement cannot be implemented without informing the parents and allowing them to provide input. This ensures that parents are actively involved in decisions affecting their child’s educational environment and that placement changes are made collaboratively, protecting the student’s right to a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

Correct Answer:

Any decision that could affect a change in placement must be accompanied by a 30-day waiting period.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

The school's and the student's legal representation must be present for all meetings about placement changes is incorrect because IDEA does not require legal representation for placement meetings. While parents can bring representation if they choose, it is not a mandated procedural safeguard.

Signatures of all IEP team members are needed to show that parents were involved in the decision-making process is incorrect because signatures are not a legal requirement to prove parental participation. IDEA emphasizes notice and opportunity to participate rather than documentation of signatures.

The parents must be informed of their unilateral power of veto over all placement decisions is incorrect because parents do not have unilateral veto power. They have the right to participate, provide input, and challenge decisions through procedural safeguards, but final placement decisions are made collaboratively by the IEP team.

Explanation:

When a school denies a student FAPE, remedies aim to compensate for educational loss or ensure appropriate services are provided. One common remedy is financial compensation or reimbursement for private services the parents obtained due to the school’s failure to provide FAPE. This remedy addresses the harm caused by the denial and is explicitly recognized under IDEA dispute resolution processes. Option C accurately reflects a legally recognized remedy.

Correct Answer:

Financial compensation

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

A. Reduced graduation requirements. This is incorrect because reducing academic standards does not address the denial of appropriate educational services and may compromise the quality of education, rather than providing a remedy for lost services.

B. Expulsion of a staff member. This is wrong because IDEA remedies focus on ensuring student access to FAPE and compensating for educational harm, not disciplining school personnel.

D. Extended school hours. This is incorrect because while additional instruction could support a student’s learning, it is not a standard legal remedy mandated by IDEA for FAPE violations; remedies are typically more directly linked to compensating for lost or denied services.

Explanation:

Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) are characterized by difficulties in academic areas that are not primarily due to intellectual disabilities, sensory impairments, or other conditions. If a student has an intellectual disability, their academic challenges are attributed to that disability rather than an SLD, making them ineligible for identification under the SLD category. Option B correctly identifies a condition that excludes eligibility for SLD.

Correct Answer:

The student has an intellectual disability.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

A. The student transferred from another school. This is irrelevant to SLD eligibility. Transfer status does not affect the determination of whether a student has a learning disability.

C. The student has not taken a state assessment. This is incorrect because SLD eligibility is based on a multi-disciplinary evaluation, not completion of state assessments. Missing a test does not determine ineligibility.

D. The student frequently disrupts instruction. While behavioral issues may be noted during evaluation, disruptive behavior alone does not disqualify a student from SLD eligibility. The primary focus is on academic performance and learning difficulties.

Explanation:

Any deviation from the services or placement specified in an IEP constitutes a change that must be considered and approved by the IEP team. Pulling a student out of the general education classroom, even temporarily, changes the least restrictive environment and cannot be implemented unilaterally by a paraprofessional. Option B correctly identifies this as a violation of IDEA because the paraprofessional acted outside the IEP parameters without team approval.

Correct Answer:

This is a due process violation because the least restrictive environment was changed without a change to the IEP.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

A. This change is within the parameters of the IEP and should continue because it has been beneficial. This is incorrect because the benefit to the student does not authorize changes outside the IEP; all modifications must be approved by the IEP team.

C. The parents should be notified immediately and given the choice as to what is best for their child. This is wrong because parent notification alone does not authorize changes to the IEP or placement; team approval is required.

D. Because it has been beneficial to the student, the IEP team should gather to modify the IEP accordingly. While the IEP team could meet to modify the plan, this option does not address the fact that the current unilateral action by the paraprofessional is already a violation. It is not sufficient to justify the immediate continuation of the pull-out instruction.

Explanation:

The IQ-achievement discrepancy model identifies specific learning disabilities by comparing a student’s intellectual ability (IQ) with their academic achievement; a significant gap suggests the presence of an SLD. In contrast, the RTI approach identifies learning disabilities by monitoring how a student responds to systematic, high-quality, research-based interventions within the general education setting. RTI emphasizes early support and progress monitoring rather than waiting for a large IQ-achievement gap to appear. Option B correctly highlights this fundamental difference between the two models.

Correct Answer:

The IQ-achievement discrepancy model focuses on the difference between a student's IQ and academic performance, while the RTI approach emphasizes monitoring a student's response to high-quality, research-based interventions.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

A. The IQ-achievement discrepancy model considers cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic influences, whereas the RTI approach does not. This is incorrect because the IQ-achievement discrepancy model does not inherently account for cultural, linguistic, or socioeconomic factors, which is a limitation of this approach. RTI is also designed to be responsive to individual student needs and can incorporate such considerations indirectly.

C. The IQ-achievement discrepancy model requires a student to meet age- or grade-level standards, whereas the RTI approach does not consider academic standards. This is wrong because the IQ-achievement discrepancy model does not directly require students to meet specific academic standards; it looks at relative differences between IQ and achievement. RTI also uses grade-level benchmarks and expected progress, so the statement misrepresents both approaches.

D. The RTI approach uses formal tests exclusively, while the IQ-achievement discrepancy model relies on classroom performance and teacher observations. This is incorrect because RTI relies primarily on progress monitoring and response to interventions, not formal testing exclusively. Similarly, the IQ-achievement model uses standardized tests, not just classroom performance or teacher observation, making this statement inaccurate.