Enforcing discipline in the classroom can be a difficult task for educators, especially when working with students with disabilities. While students with disabilities do need to be disciplined, it is important they are not being punished for something directly caused by their disability. Unfortunately, this can lead to confusion with what to do when a student with a disability acts out. IDEA does not restrict disciplining students with disabilities. In fact, according to the National Association of School Psychologists’ assistant executive director, Kevin Dwyer (1997), “There is nothing in IDEA that restricts schools from disciplining children with disabilities. In fact, some would say that, by not addressing these dangerous behaviors, the …show more content…
Educators, staff, parents, and students all have a right to be familiar with a school’s code of conduct. Students retain information differently, some can learn and understand expectations by observation and many others have to learn by personal experience. Dwyer (1997) believes, “Parents of children with disabilities should be given the opportunity to discuss the discipline code when it is a concern for their child and to be partners in finding effective ways of assisting in maintaining the code and its intent.” (p. 3) If a behavior may be caused directly by a student’s disability, then managing behavior can be adapted as an IEP …show more content…
It is not decided by the "ability of the child to determine right from wrong." Under IDEA, a manifestation determination must include an analysis of the child 's program as well as the child 's physical, cognitive, developmental, mental and emotional challenges. The child’s behavior may be considered unrelated to the disability if the disability did not impair the child’s understanding of the impact of the serious consequences of the behavior and if the disability did not impair the ability of the child to control the behavior. (p. 7)
When a behavior is determined to be a manifestation of the disability, a child cannot be expelled from the school because of the behavior in question. If a behavior is dangerous, such as violating school policies with weapons, a placement that is secure is necessary. However, an IEP, FBA, and a BIP all will be necessary to help prevent the behavior from reoccurring. (Trent,
The Gaskin Settlement Agreement is an agreement between a group of families and advocacy organizations who filed a class action lawsuit against the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) on behalf of a group of children with disabilities in 1994. This agreement does not change a student’s placement, program, or IEP in any manner. Only the IEP team has the authority to make modifications that will impact a student’s IEP. The main goal of this settlement is to make sure that IEP teams will determine if the goals in a student’s IEP may be implemented in a general education setting with supplementary aids and services prior to considering an environment that is more restrictive in nature. The elements of this case were designed to help increase the capacity of school districts to provide related services, SDI that is appropriate, supplementary aids and services, and supports to students who have disabilities that are placed in general education classrooms. The PDE lists many important elements of the Settlement Agreement to be aware of...
Whether it was in school, the classroom or the home environment students with disabilities may exhibit various behavioral problems. Occasionally, these behaviors are hostile, aggressive, and disruptive and may impede learning for the ones who display such behaviors as well as others. It often a challenge to deliver a lesson or maintain control of the class due to the fact that teacher may not have sufficient knowledge on how to manage these types of behaviors. In “When the Chips are Down” Richard Lavoie give helpful advice that emphasizes on dealing with behavioral issues in a successful manner and also how these problems can be anticipated before they start.
Graziano’s article over the handling of his son’s disability in the classroom also involves issues that relate to teachers detecting signs of mental illness in the classrooms, how teachers identify a behavioral troubled child, and training school counselors on the Section 504 policy that are all happening in the world today. Realizing these issues can help parents with giving their child the best out of their education and can also help teachers understand the importance of their relationship with students. Everyone should have the opportunity for a brighter future and having a learning disability should not be the end of the road for any student.
In this case, the IEP requirements of the child Frank Evans were not met by the school and the district. The reading and the facts provided in the case show that the district did not have any IEP for the child prepared at the beginning of the school session (Wrightslaw - Caselaw - Evans v. Rhinebeck (S.D. NY 1996), n.d.). The IDEA states that the IEP has to be prepared in a meeting where the child’s parents, a qualified spokesperson from the concerned school, the child’s teacher and when possible the child himself. With the consensus of the people mentioned here a detailed document about the assessment of the child’s educational needs and an action plan to meet the same is devised. Frank Evans was within his legal rights under IDEA to have an IEP for himself which was not provided and hence severely undermined the child’s performance levels in the school (FindLaw's the United States Supreme Court case and opinions,
Under the IDEA’s Regulations on Discipline (b) General (1) School personnel under this section may remove a child with a disability who violates a code of student conduct from his or her current placement to an appropriate interim alternative educational setting, another setting, or suspension, for not more than 10 consecutive school days (to the extent those alternatives are applied to children without disabilities), and for additional removals of not more than 10 consecutive school days in that same school year for separate incidents of misconduct (as long as those removals do not constitute a change of placement under § 300.536).
Similar to IDEA, is Section 504 of the Act. Students are eligible for Section 504 if they have a "physical or mental impairment which substantially limits a major life activity." Section 504 also requires schools to meet certain evaluation criteria in order to assess how a student's disability affects the child's educational performance.
Special education includes addressing students’ academic needs as well as their behavioral needs. A student with a disability is not exempt from disciplinary measures, as students with can suspended and even expelled from the school environment. More specifically, students with emotional disturbance can display maladaptive behaviors. These maladaptive behaviors can generate unsafe learning environments. More importantly, the creation of an effective behavior intervention plan (BIP) is imperative. The development of a BIP can aid in the reduction of maladaptive behaviors, thus decrease the likelihood of a suspension or expulsion. My current role as a special education program specialist permits the
Yell, M. L., & Peterson, R. L. (1995). Disciplining students with disabilities and those at risk for
General education high school teacher, Michael Withers, failed to comply with his student’s Individual Education Plan (IEP). D.D. Doe’s IEP required tests to be read orally. Despite knowledge of this IEP and being instructed to follow the IEP by the superintendent, school principal, special education director, and special education teacher, Withers still refused to make the accommodations for D.D.’s handicapping condition. As a result, D.D. failed the history class. His parents filed charges against Withers, arguing that D.D was not afforded the right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) promised to all students by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). They also filed a claim for injuctive relief against the Taylor County Board of Education to enforce the laws that protect handicapped students.
Nappi court case went to trial in the district court. The court found that ruled in favor of the plaintiff, which was Kathy Stuart. The judge explained that expulsion would reject Stuart from a free and appropriate education guaranteed to special education students in the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). The expulsion of handicapped children not only jeopardizes their right to an free and appropriate education, but it is also inconsistent with the procedures established by the Handicapped Act for changing the placement of disruptive children. Leagle (1985). STUART v. NAPPI (610 F.Supp. 90). Retrieved from http://www.leagle.com/decision/1985700610FSupp90_1677/STUART%20BY%20AND%20THROUGH%20STUART%20v.%20NAPPI. The court said that expelling students with disabilities will limit their availability to an education in the least restrictive environment. However, the court did rule that school officials could substitute an expulsion with suspension when dealing with a student who met the criteria to be covered by the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). In fact, the court ruled that a school district could suspend a student from school for a maximum of only ten days. The court also determined that a school district could also hold a meeting to change the placement of the student if a more restrictive environment was needed. First, school authorities can take swift disciplinary measures, such as suspension, against disruptive handicapped children. Secondly, a (special education committee) can request a change in the placement of handicapped children who have demonstrated that their present placement is inappropriate by disrupting the education of other children. The Handicapped Act thereby affords schools with both short-term and long-term methods of dealing with handicapped children who are behavioral problems. Casetext (1978). STUART V. NAPPI, (D.CONN. 1978). Retrieved from
What do we do with children with disabilities in the public school? Do we include them in the general education class with the “regular” learning population or do we separate them to learn in a special environment more suited to their needs? The problem is many people have argued what is most effective, full inclusion where students with all ranges of disabilities are included in regular education classes for the entire day, or partial inclusion where children spend part of their day in a regular education setting and the rest of the day in a special education or resource class for the opportunity to work in a smaller group setting on specific needs. The need for care for children with identified disabilities both physical and learning continues to grow and the controversy continues.
National Dissemination Center For Children With Disabilities (2010). Applying Discipline Rules to Students with Disabilities. Retrieved from http://nichcy.org/SchoolsAndAdministrators/Pages/discipline.aspx
High Incidence disabilities are mild disabilities that affect most of the special education students in schools today. “Approximately 36 percent of all students with disabilities served under IDEA have specific learning disabilities.” (Turnbull, Turnbull, Wehmeyer & Shogren, 2016 p. 104)The three areas that fall under the title of a high incidence disabilities are learning disabilities, mild intellectual disabilities, and emotional/ behavioral disorders. Students with high incidence disabilities are taught and spend most of their time in the general education classroom. They are supported in the classroom with accommodations, modifications, paraprofessionals and related services to help them succeed. They may spend a portion of their day receiving support from a special education teacher, or another related service providers such as a speech pathologist, physical therapist, occupational therapist, or social worker outside of the classroom. It becomes apparent when students start school which ones have a high incidence disability. This is because when they start school educators begin to notice they are different from their peers sometimes socially, behaviorally, or they begin to struggle academically. They all share some similar traits such as a short attention span and lower academic skills in certain areas or subjects. They may also have difficulties with their behavior or social development. At that point they may be referred to for testing or an evaluation to see what might be going on with the student.
To begin with, full inclusion in the education system for people with disabilities should be the first of many steps that are needed to correct the social injustices that people with disabilities currently face. Students with disabilities are far too frequently isolated and separated in the education system (Johnson). They are often provided a diluted, inferior education and denied meaningful opportunities to learn. There are many education rights for children with disabilities to p...
A few people making changes is not enough; there needs to be a lot more emphasis placed on helping students with disabilities. With the discrimination against handicapped or students with disabilities, it is up to the parents to ensure the students get a good education. The students with the disability and their parents have to fights for equal rights (Barkan, 2008).