Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 167 guests, and 10 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    parentologyco, Smartlady60, petercgeelan, eterpstra, Valib90
    11,410 Registered Users
    March
    S M T W T F S
    1 2
    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    10 11 12 13 14 15 16
    17 18 19 20 21 22 23
    24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 2 of 2 1 2
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 5,244
    Likes: 1
    I
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    I
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 5,244
    Likes: 1
    Quote
    Is there anything I can do prior to this meeting to prepare?

    There is quite a bit of advocacy information and meeting prep information on the forum, much of it sourced from articles on the Davidson Database and resources listed there.

    Here's a thread on advocacy with many resources mentioned.

    Tips for meeting prep have been posted on other threads but in case it is helpful, here is a brief summary:

    - Research state laws and the school or district policies and practices. This information is often found online. You may wish to print and put this in an advocacy ring binder to refer to over the years as the laws and policies/practices may change over time.
    - Have any test results and other pertinent facts available to share (milestones, reading lists, other accomplishments/achievements)
    - It is good to have them speak first. If asked to speak first, you may simply wish to thank everyone for attending and summarize that you are all here to share information and ideas about how to best meet your child's educational needs... and that you would like to hear from them.
    - Agenda
    - Know who is in the meeting, and their role(s)
    - Stay calm
    - Know what you are asking for
    - TAKE NOTES including Who-What-Where-When-Why-How of support services and/or differentiation, so you can summarize in an e-mail afterward [Some families announce they plan to record the meeting and then do so, rather than taking notes.]
    - Use active listening (rephrase what has been said, and put it in a question form) to clarify understanding
    - Be open to receiving the school's data/observations.
    - Listen to any proposals they may make, ask appropriate probing questions, such as how a proposal may work, how the proposal may help your child, the schedule/frequency of service delivery, etc
    - Do not be forced to make a decision if you need time
    - Summarize next steps & time frames, and/or need for a follow-up meeting
    - Thank everyone for their time & interest
    - After the meeting, write a summary (points of agreement, etc) and share it, possibly by e-mail

    Joined: Apr 2010
    Posts: 2,498
    D
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    D
    Joined: Apr 2010
    Posts: 2,498
    Agree with what Polar said. You are not in bad shape going in, and I would not expect an ambush unless there's solid evidence that one is coming.

    Thing to know: an eligibility meeting is a meeting to establish what the needs are. The key thing is to make sure the needs are all named and agreed upon at this meeting.

    This is "needs" not as in "diagnoses," but as in "she needs to learn to write down homework assignments, because she is not doing it" or "she will not interact at recess without adult support."

    I find it helpful to walk into such a meeting with a detailed list of problems to solve, with supporting data if possible, and then my goal is to make sure those problems make it into the document.

    The reason for this is that the eligibility meeting is then the basis for deciding on services (under an IEP) or accommodations (under a 504). Any problem not acknowledged in the eligibility meeting won't likely be addressed under the plan. So you want this document to be as clear and complete as possible.

    Hang in there.

    DeeDee

    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 24
    K
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    K
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 24
    Thanks for all the helpful comments!

    I received a request from the Special School District to attend a "pre-eligibility" conference. The SSD psychologist would like to give me the results ahead of the meeting on December 2nd.

    I am still very nervous. DD10 has been evaluated once before, and during that eligibility conference there was only the school psychologist and myself in attendance. Like others have said, it could be a good sign that so many are attending this meeting. This has been an extremely adversarial process, so I am still very worried. It wasn't until the threat of legal action that progress was made towards getting her an evaluation, even after I provided them with outside evaluations and subsequent diagnoses. Prior to her outside evaluation, I was certain for an entire year that she was autistic. I just couldn't get anyone to listen to me or take me seriously. The school made me feel like I was an crazy, irrational, helicopter parent. It was a really exhausting and emotionally draining process. I have never felt so useless and inept in my life.

    I am going over the MO state laws on "educational autism" and motor skill impairment. Those are the only two things that I know she will need services for because I have outside evaluations. The occupational therapist called me today and is sending home a "sensory" packet to fill out for DD10. It sounds like she must have found something during her evaluation that she wanted to follow up on. I must admit though, I am not really aware of how this would impact her educational performance. Thanks Indigo for the suggestion. I tend to be very cerebral about most problems, so the more information I have the more prepared I will feel.

    The pre-conference is tomorrow, I will hopefully know more then. What I am worried about most is that they will conduct a poor quality evaluation and come back and say there is no evidence of disability! After three years, I think I will lose my mind if I hear those 4 words again!

    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 24
    K
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    K
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 24
    First off, Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

    I attended the pre-eligibility conference yesterday. Everything has been rushed to get done before the Holiday. I did get some interesting information from the school psychologist. I tried to write everything down as she was dictating it to me, (she would not give me a written copy of the results ahead of the meeting). I may have missed a few things, but I think I got most of what she told me down. It seems like DD10 should get services for autism and possibly OT, but what specific goals should be focused on for her IEP? There is so much information to sift through. Is there anyone who has services for their child that could comment? I was surprised at how poorly DD10 scored on the BASC-2 and the CELF-5. Those results were really hard to hear. What do scores of severe on the SRS-II mean? I had always thought DD10 was rather high functioning. This makes me wonder. DD10 seemed to be doing much better this year. She is still very forgetful and needs a lot of help getting dressed and ready in the morning, but seems to be taking more responsibility for herself than she has in the past. I am just wondering what services I should request for DD10 this year?

    BASC-2 (Behavior and Adaptive Behaviors)

    Areas noted by all 3 teachers and parents:

    1. Hyperactivity
    2. Atypicality
    3. Adaptability
    4. Social Skills
    5. Activities of Daily Living
    6. Externalizing emotions
    7. Depression
    8. Withdrawal
    9. Functional Communication
    10.Somatization


    BRIEF (for Executive Function)

    The following areas of concern were noted on the questionnaire:

    1. Inhibition
    2. Shift
    3. Emotional Control

    These three summarize the Behavior Regulation Index which is elevated for DD10

    4. Initiation
    5. Working Memory
    6. Planning and Organization
    7. Monitoring

    These four make up the Meta-Cognition Portion of the test, which was elevated for DD10.


    Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS-II)

    This questionnaire measures interpersonal communication, and autistic behaviors. Responses are listed in normal, mild, moderate and severe classifications.

    4th Grade teacher: 68 (Moderate)

    3rd Grade teacher: 80 (Severe)

    Gifted teacher: Normal

    Me: 80 (Severe)

    DH: 80 (Severe)

    Areas of Concern noted on questionnaire:

    Social Awareness: (Recognizing Social Cues) It was noted that DD10 seemed comfortable being “out of step” with other children and unconcerned about fitting in with other kids. Also significant difficulty with modulating the volume of her voice and general inappropriate loud talking

    Social Cognition: (The ability to interpret social signals) It was noted here that DD10 had difficulty with the typical back and forth of conversation.

    Social Communication: It was noted here that DD10 had significant difficulty maintaining eye contact. She can initiate eye contact, but quickly looks away and will stare behind the person she is talking to.

    Social Motivation: (The extent to which she engages peers). There were mixed responses to this from those filling out the questionnaire.

    Restrictive and Repetitive Behaviors: It as noted that DD10 had many rigid, inflexible behaviors and difficulty with changes to routine.


    Behavioral Observations

    Behavioral observations of DD10 during various classroom activities and special classes (art, library) were completed by the school psychologist and the Language Diagnostician.

    DD10 was observed during library and was seen arguing with another child. Her interactions with other children were observed and it was noted that DD10 experienced frequent rejection by peers when she initiated attempts to interact with them.

    DD10 was also observed during art class. DD10 had missed several art classes due to being pulled out of class for testing. While she had been absent, the art teacher had rearranged the seating. When DD10 came to class, she noticed there was another student sitting in her seat. DD10 was very distressed and looked very confused. The teacher informed her of the change and directed her to her new seat. DD10 did eventually sit in her new seat, and seemed to accept the change. However, when she sat down, she turned to a student sitting near her and told him he was sitting in the wrong seat. The school psychologist also noted that although DD10 was capable of transitioning to a new activity, she did so very slowly and was always lagging behind everyone else in the class. DD10 can follow directions and did have some positive peer interactions during the observation period.


    ADOS, Autism Diagnostic Observation Scales

    The ADOS scales were administered by the language diagnostician and a speech pathologist. The school psychologist observed the administration of the ADOS. The ADOS looks at several criteria to diagnose autism: Social skills, Play Skills, Reciprocal Communication, and Restrictive and Repetitive Behaviors. It was noted that DD10 was happy, social and cooperative during the testing period. Several areas of concern were noted:

    Eye contact: Although DD10 was capable of initiating eye contact, and seemed to realize that some amount of eye contact was necessary, she could not sustain eye contact and eye contact was fleeting during one on one conversation.

    Conversation Skills: Although DD10 was eager to initiate conversation, her conversations were one-sided. When asked about her recent vacation with her Grandmother, DD10 was eager to discuss it. However, when the language diagnostician interrupted her and mentioned that she too had recently gone on a vacation, DD10 did not respond appropriately by asking about her vacation and went right back to discussing her own vacation experience.

    Hyperactivity: DD10 had lots of movement during the evaluation period. She was seen to rub her leg against the table repeatedly during the test period and fidgeted in her seat. The language diagnostician noted that she felt this activity was sensory seeking and not necessarily a hyperactive behavior. Follow up from the Occupational Therapist was requested regarding a Sensory evaluation.

    Play Skills: This was centered on DD10’s ability to participate in make-believe play. Although DD10 was eager to participate in the make-believe play, it was noted that she needed to control the play and dictated the roles and actions of the play participants.

    CELF-5, Pragmatic Language Evaluation

    The CELF-5 is a pragmatic language evaluation and looks at conversations skills and other communication methods (non-verbal communication). This test was administered by the language diagnostician and the responses were completed by DD10’s teacher. The scores are scaled, with an average score being 10. DD10 scored a 3 on this test, indicating a significant degree of difficulty with pragmatic language and basic conversation skills. Areas of concern identified on the test were:

    Conversation Skills

    1. Maintaining Eye Contact
    2. Make relevant responses to conversation
    3. Able to adjust language to follow conversation
    4. Having a sense of humor and understanding jokes
    5. Able to join or leave a conversation properly
    6. Often make comments and respond to others actions appropriately
    7. Responding to others when spoken to
    8. Responding appropriately to directions
    9. Give and ask for directions at an appropriate time
    10. Ask permission to perform a task when necessary
    11. Apologize when appropriate


    Non-verbal Communication Skills

    1. Read and interpret facial expressions
    2. Greeting others appropriately
    3. Interpreting tone of voice in conversation
    4. Interpreting body language appropriately
    5. Detecting voice intonation during conversation
    6. Interpreting expressive gestures appropriately
    7. Matching facial expression to her own verbal responses
    8. Keeping an appropriate body distance with others and maintaining personal space

    Fine Motor Skill and Gross Motor Skill


    These evaluations are still pending. A fine motor skill evaluation has been completed, as well as, a gross motor evaluation. Results will be presented at the eligibility conference. There is still a sensory evaluation pending from the occupational therapist.

    Joined: Oct 2014
    Posts: 675
    P
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    P
    Joined: Oct 2014
    Posts: 675
    kitkat, big hugs! You sound overwhelmed, and I'm sure it must have been a draining meeting. It's so hard to hear so much about problems with our children, but just remember - you now finally have what you need to build a real plan with your school. No more denial. Next week, you'll have all those people in a room together for one reason: to help your DD. For now, enjoy your family and your holiday, while much wiser folk than I provide more useful advice for your next meeting.

    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    From the look of it, you received a very thorough evaluation, responding to the outside eval's Dx of autism. That they did not repeat your outside eval categories suggests that they are accepting those findings. You got the ADOS, which, up until the release of the 2nd edition this year (so it's not inappropriate to use the 1st edition), was the gold standard for autism diagnosis, and it appears that it was properly conducted as an arena eval. The other instruments are similarly appropriate (all things I would choose as go-to assessments).

    BASC-2:

    2,3,4,5,8,9 are all very consistent with the ASD. 1 (& the associated 6, which is actually a composite score comprised of 1 and two other scales) could be consistent with ASD, especially if it is more sensory-seeking behaviors, as hypothesized during the ADOS. 7 would not be that surprising, given the observations of ineffective attempts at engaging with others.

    CELF-5:

    this is a rating scale as well, completed by one of the same raters as for the BASC-2, BRIEF, and SRS-2, so it's not that surprising that the ratings are similar, just in more detail.

    SRS-2:

    Note that, in school, the ratings are progressively better as the putative educational fit improves, reaching normal limits in the GT classroom. This may suggest that her social communication performance is better with those who are more skilled at meeting her where she is (better communication partners), most likely, both in the cognitive/academic sense, and because high cognitive partners are better able to adapt to her.

    I often see more problematic numbers at home, probably because there is a much wider range of expected responses in the home and community environment, than in the school setting. The rules of school are highly consistent year after year, and even those who are challenged by adapting to fluid social situations can usually figure out enough, and have enough stability in the setting expectations, to manage school. The community, on the other hand, changes all the time. Even the most routinized home also doesn't run on bells and daily agendas. And, of course, many children work really hard at meeting expectations at school, and then let it all out at home.

    That she can perform better in some settings suggests that, like many high-cognitive individuals with social communication deficits, she has cognitive understanding of some rules for social engagement, but not automaticity, so she can employ them when supported and highly-motivated, but is probably drained by the effort. (Not unlike the deteriorating spelling and handwriting we've discussed elsewhere, with respect to dysgraphics.)

    I'll try to address recommendations a little later in the weekend.


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    IEP goal foci:

    I think pretty clearly the results of the eval emphasize social communication. Recs should be typical ASD-type social goals, such as working on identifying & labeling emotions in self and others, stress/anxiety-management, reciprocal communication (including turn-taking, perspective-taking, "throwing the ball"), preferably in facilitated social skills groups or dyads with disabled and non-disabled peers. Transfer and generalization are usually big problems for ASD kids, so social skills training (through a speech path, psych, school soc. worker, or guidance/adjustment counselor, etc.) needs to involve coaching through live situations somewhere in the plan. (Although dry run groups can be helpful as a preparatory phase.)

    Some children do well with video self-modeling as a technique (Take and edit video of the child appropriately demonstrating the skill, with a positive outcome--edit the video(s) to insure that it portrays the desired skill and outcome, even if it didn't exactly happen that way in real life. Have child view edited self-video and practice.)

    She should have access to a predictable short-list of safe people in the building, in the event of spiraling anxiety or interpersonal conflict with peers or adults, so that consistent strategies can be reviewed, cued, and coached in vivo. Disciplinary measures (should they be necessary) should always have her safe person present to de-escalate her and act as her advocate.

    Environmental accommodations also ought to include clear, concrete, predictable expectations, consequences, and routines. Previews of changes in routines. Careful (or non-) use of vague, figurative, ironic, or metaphorical language by adults.

    Any sensory recommendations, based on OT results. But usually, avoid overstimulating sensory environments, especially crowded areas with many people, loud or persistent noises, or visually cluttered scenes/spaces.


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 24
    K
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    K
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 24
    Thanks so much aeh!

    I attended the eligibility conference today. I am not very happy with the outcome. The school psychologist withheld all the data on DD10's motor evaluations during our pre-conference, saying they were still pending. She only shared the data that had an outcome she thought I would accept. The motor skill evaluations basically said that DD10 had no issues in fine or gross motor skills (eye-roll) and that by their assessment DD10 is a perfect child capable of olympic athlete feats. This is after I provided them my outside evaluation stating clearly that DD10 had a fine motor skill delay and required OT therapy to correct this. The school OT said that they aren't concerned about her fine motor skills and said she is able to "access the learning environment". Further, for the sensory evaluation, the OT had DD10 fill out the evaluation form herself. She sent one home with me, but didn't include any of my responses in the evaluation report! I know DD10 has problems with visual motor integration, as evidenced by her outside evaluation. She is terrified to walk down stairs or escalators and cries if I make her. She also has significant sensory issues. I feel I should pursue this further. Is this worth fighting over?

    Basically, the only thing that the special school district would acknowledge is that she is autistic, and therefore does need pragmatic language and social skill assistance. They even refused to add any behavioral modification goals to her IEP, saying that they have to do an additional ABA evaluation for that and that takes 4 months! They said they have to have the IEP written within 30 days of her eligibility. Why the heck didn't they already start this! I am beyond frustrated. DD10 is not going to get any appropriate services and I am feeling pressured to go forward with this process, when I know these evaluations have not been interpreted appropriately. What else can I get to shore up her need for school OT?

    kitkat24


    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    I'm sorry you've had such a frustrating experience.

    But the good news is that at least they acknowledge the autism, and the social communication needs. You should also know that it's not all or nothing. You can partially reject the IEP, accepting the parts that you agree with, and rejecting the finding that there is no need for OT services, and additionally requesting the ABA evaluation. Then the pragmatics/social skills interventions can start while the ABA eval is pending. Plus, you have in place the finding of eligibility. The team reconvenes after the additional eval is complete, and revises the IEP as indicated.

    If they didn't reference your sensory rating scale at all, I would start by inquiring about the printed copies of evaluation reports from each specialist, which you have a right to. Then you can ask for clarification about the interpretation of your rating scale versus your daughter's or her teacher's. For future reference, you have a right to request evaluation documents at least two business days prior to the IEP meeting, which would allow you to catch any of these inconsistencies earlier. I presume the pre-eligibility meeting was supposed to address this right, by presenting you with the findings at least two days prior. You still want the papers in your hands, though.

    As to the timeline for the new IEP: actually, districts have been cited by compliance officers for coming to the table with a pre-written IEP, as it violates parental due process (your right to have a say in development of the IEP). I'm surprised they get as long as 30 days to write it, though. In my state, the new IEP has to be issued within 3 school days, unless a summary of services goes home with the parent, in which you get 10 school days.

    ETA: I just looked up your state, and see that you have a multi-part process, where there is an eligibility conference first, then they have 30 days for the IEP team, and another 10 days to issue the IEP. Although different parts of the website say 20 days for the same thing. I think they may be switching back and forth between calendar and school days.

    Here's a timeline:

    https://www.ssdmo.org/step2/timeline.html


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Page 2 of 2 1 2

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Testing with accommodations
    by aeh - 03/27/24 01:58 PM
    Quotations that resonate with gifted people
    by indigo - 03/27/24 12:38 PM
    For those interested in astronomy, eclipses...
    by indigo - 03/23/24 06:11 PM
    California Tries to Close the Gap in Math
    by thx1138 - 03/22/24 03:43 AM
    Gifted kids in Illinois. Recommendations?
    by indigo - 03/20/24 05:41 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5