He wrote: "The team will gladly address further your concerns related to DS's IEP. Having been involved in or copied on prior e-mails related to DS's IEP document and/or the implementation of his IEP, I think it would serve everyone better if we were to hold such discussions in an IEP meeting rather than through e-mail. I believe it would be more effective in achieving a common understanding."
However, my email to him was not really "concern" - it was a reminder to them and to him as to what they are suppose to do ... The IEP accommodation is "provide a scribe for multiple written assessments and assignments." I basically said in my email, paraphrasing for simplicity: "Okay make sure you guys do what you are suppose to do, i.e, provide the scribe so he can access his education because it looks to mye by your statements and emails that you are not doing that consistently and that is unacceptable." And, 'remember, don't hold off until he is tired and don't try to push him to increase his stamina (as you have been saying that you do) b/c that is the OT and neurologist's job. Your job is to teach and provide him a scribe so he can learn.' And finally, 'if you can't do that and you can't provide a scribe who will be nice then we will need to file a complaint. so please do not put us in that position.'
I also asked how the meeting with the para went and maybe they should consider sending her to disability sensitivity training b/c I know they get money for that under my son's iep.
I said all of this SUPER NICELY and I mean I was just lovely
I am tempted to be like "no I don't have any concerns I think my email pretty much says it all perfectly but thanks anyway.' And my really angry side felt like saying "oh and by the way you can't tell me I am not permitted to communicate with you to document violations and our agreements!