Study of the Mount Diablo Unified School District - Mt. Diablo Unified ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Policies, Procedures, and Complianceteachers are operating outside of the school‐based team process. Furthermore, the 202referrals from other school personnel and sources suggest the need for stronger supportsfor the buildings and staff to assist students in their home environment.Typically, the school‐based team sets the criteria that teachers must follow in makingreferrals and oversees the entire referral and evaluation process. Further, the school‐basedteam should review referral documentation and any other supplemental informationprovided, and determine how to best address the concerns. The team should have theoption to decide to proceed immediately with an evaluation, gather more informationbefore making a decision, or continue to implement interventions in the general educationclassroom.Considerations for Issue 4‐5:• Document the reason for referrals for evaluation of special education services.Teachers should be directed to work within stated processes and initiate a referralonly when there is data to support going to an outside multidisciplinary team.Teachers must also have an understanding that, in most cases, the student willremain in the general education class and academic core. All participants mustrealize that testing a child is an expensive process that requires the involvement ofmany specialized staff members at great cost. Unnecessary referrals only takeaway from the services and financial resources that are needed by other children.It is inappropriate for teachers to bypass the SST process and ask a parent toinitiate a referral.• Ensure that parents understand that testing their child is not an entitlement, but achild’s right if it is suspected that the child has a disability (IDEA 2004). Testing forpurposes other than identification and location misuses the intention of IDEA andpotentially discriminates against those individuals without a disability.• Provide professional development on strategies to be employed in the classroom,the pre‐referral process, and the RTI guidelines either once each semester in ameeting or offer the training once and record it.Cost Implications for Issue 4‐5:Costs for this recommendation are associated with professional development. Allocation ofprofessional development funds from IDEA, Title I, or Title II funds could be considered forthis purpose. Once the staff is trained in pre‐referral and RTI and they receive developmenton remedial and behavioral management skills, the need for support staff should belessened. The very least that should occur is that current staff should be utilized for theconsiderations detailed above.MGT of America, Inc. Page 4‐11
Policies, Procedures, and Compliance4.3 Related Compliance and Programmatic IssuesIssue 4‐6: IEP Meeting Membership and Allocation of District Resources.There is evidence that general education teachers are not consistently attending IndividualEducational Program (IEP) meetings, and that some local education agency representatives(LEAs) are not remaining in the IEP conference in its entirety, thus allowing someone else toallocate district resources and make final decisions as to placements. There were alsocomments that some principals add services to the IEP to appease teachers who wantadditional help, rather than making team decisions based on the needs of the student andas specified in the IEP.Some principals and case managers stated parents are requesting such services as a one‐ononeassistant or specialized programming to be added to their child’s IEP without supportivedata that without the service their child would be denied a free appropriate publiceducation (FAPE). While the district has a process in place for assigning one‐on‐oneassistants, the process seems to be ineffective. MGT received reports that when requestsare made, they are seldom denied.Considerations for Issue 4‐6:• Ensure that a general education teacher is involved in the IEP meeting to theextent California law requires. The IDEA requires a general education teacher tobe in attendance when it is appropriate, which is certainly when placement orreconsiderations take place.• Ensure that a local education agency representative be in attendance at the IEPmeeting to allocate district resources as required by IDEA 2004. Attending themeeting to sign‐in and then leaving is a violation of the law and ethicallyinappropriate. In times of serious budget cuts, principals can be extremely helpfulby monitoring the placement and IEP development processes so that not only areneeded services applied, but that requests for services without appropriate dataare not added. If principals are appropriately trained, they will be able to retain acollegial environment by merely asking for the appropriate data to support therequest. Principals should be advised that it is inappropriate to make decisionsoutside of the committee and without parental participation.• Hold principals accountable for special education resource allocations in theirbuildings.• Include adherence to special education regulations in the school administrationevaluation process.MGT of America, Inc. Page 4‐12
Page 1 and 2:
A Study of theMount Diablo Unified
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGEEXECUTIVE SUMM
Page 6 and 7:
Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryF
Page 8 and 9:
Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryI
Page 10 and 11:
Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryF
Page 12 and 13:
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND PEER DI
Page 14 and 15:
Introduction and Peer District Comp
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
CHAPTER 2: DISTRICT OPERATIONS AND
Page 34 and 35:
District Operations and Associated
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51: District Operations and Associated
Page 56 and 57: CHAPTER 3: SERVICE DELIVERY OPTIONS
Page 58 and 59: Service Delivery Options and Contin
Page 90 and 91: CHAPTER 4: POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AN
Page 92 and 93: Policies, Procedures, and Complianc
Page 114 and 115: CHAPTER 5: PERSONNEL SERVICES AND P
Page 116 and 117: Personnel Services and Professional
Page 124 and 125: CHAPTER 6: SPIELER V. MT. DIABLO UN
Page 126 and 127: Spieler v. Mt. Diablo Unified Schoo
Page 128 and 129: Spieler v. Mt. Diablo Unified Schoo
Page 130 and 131: APPENDIX A: SURVEYRESULTS
Page 132 and 133: PART A: ADMINISTRATION7. Special ed
Page 134 and 135: EXHIBIT A-3 (Continued)COMPARISON O
Page 136 and 137: PART E: CURRICULUM ANDINSTRUCTIONE.
Page 138 and 139: EXHIBIT A-7COMPARISON OF SURVEY RES
Page 140 and 141: PART G: DISCIPLINEEXHIBIT A-9COMPAR
Page 142 and 143: EXHIBIT A-11COMPARISON OF SURVEY RE
Page 144 and 145: PART K: SPECIALEDUCATION PROGRAMFUN
Page 146 and 147: Appendix A: Survey ResultsEXHIBIT A
Page 148 and 149: Appendix A: Survey ResultsEXHIBIT A
Page 150 and 151:
Appendix A: Survey ResultsEXHIBIT A
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
APPENDIX BBIBLIOGRAPHYBooksAspy, Ru
show all

Study of the Mount Diablo Unified School District - Mt. Diablo Unified ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?