Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Twice Exceptional Gifted/Asperger's and School Testing

This is my first time posting. DD10 (4th grade) has been receiving gifted services at her elementary school since 1st grade. She would be considered highly gifted by IQ score. I now know my daughter is 2E and she was just diagnosed with autism after a long 3 year fight with her school. I had to get multiple independent evaluations, all paid for at my expense. DD10 has been diagnosed with the following (so far): Asperger's Syndrome, ADHD, Convergence Insufficiency, Accommodative Infacility, Gross and Fine Motor skill delay. I got the evaluations sequentially rather than all at once, because the school refused to evaluate her 4 times over a two year period. Now, after filing complaints, mediation, and multiple meetings concerning what testing to be done, the school is conducting an evaluation. What worries me is the quality of their evaluation. DD10 was evaluated once in 2012 by the school and they found no evidence of disability. I have since invalidated every test they performed with independent testing. Should I be concerned? The school has only agreed to test motor, social/emotional behavioral, and language. What testing would be appropriate in her case? DD10 is struggling in the following areas:
1. Auditory Processing (verbal directions, recall and order of directions)
2. Classroom transitions
3. Behavioral (tantrums, emotional meltdowns)
4. Writing and pencil tasks
5. Sensory Issues
6. Motor skill delays
7. Slow Processing Speed
8. Social Skills
9. Communication
10. Visual Perception problems

Should I follow up with my own independent testing? If so, what would be crucial? I was told by the school if they don't find any area of disability other than motor skills, they would decline to offer her OT therapy in school. Any help navigating this process would be much appreciated!

kitkat24

Are they agreeing to include the results of your independent evaluations in the discussion? It sounds like your testing is less than a year old, which makes it not only unnecessary, but inadvisable to re-test with the same instruments.

As to your list of concerns, most of them do fall in the areas usually assessed by OT, social-emotional-behavioral, and language. The only one I might consider follow-up private testing for is #1, auditory processing, as a good central auditory processing eval usually requires hospital audiology facilities (because of the expensive specialized equipment). If that comes up as a deficit, that would also give you an additional diagnosis, so that OT becomes not a stand-alone service, but a related service. Also, you already have a diagnosis of ASD in hand, presumably from a legitimate evaluator, so the question of identifying an area of disability should be settled (as for a 504 plan). It's more a question of identifying educational impact (for an IEP).

I just wanted to offer some support. I spent 3 years battling our local school and it was incredibly demoralizing and frustrating and nothing was going to convince them they were not doing the right things by DD.

I'm dealing with the same type of thing. The school thinks it's Ok to do about 2-4 tests for a comprehensive eval, even with multiple areas of concern. They refused to evaluate some of my areas of concern, like math fluency, for instance, because DD's standardized test scores (untimed) are high and they actually put that in a prior written notice. Something like "We refuse to test X,Y, and Z because it's unwarranted." I ended up calling the State Dept. of Special Ed, which I do frequently, and talked to a woman who works in compliance or due process. She was appalled and told me to just file a complaint already. I told her I just want to get the inept people off the team and she ended up calling the special ed director who is trying to put together a decent eval. If you get the special ed director involved and say things like "I'm really trying to avoid the need to request an independent evaluation(in our state the district needs to pay), or filing a written complaint with the State." That's the ONLY thing that gets them to listen. I have tried being super nice--it never works.

We had the same issues with OT last year with DS (at a different school) and what we ended up doing was getting a written outside diagnosis of Developmental Coordination Disorder and they wrote a "Physical Impairment" IEP. "Other Health Disability" is another category he could have fit in to. That got him OT and DAPE, as well as academic services like writing from a special ed teacher since he had inadequate classroom work. He was also put into a social skills group because the outside neuropsych recommended it, although I think that has had very limited value in his case since they are placing him with kids who are much more impaired.

Call a team meeting to discuss your concerns and an evaluation plan and make sure teachers are included (unless the teachers are unhelpful). Tell them they need to be assertive about what they are dealing with. It's hard for special ed staff to argue with co-workers. If you have already had a meeting, and they refuse to test all your areas of concern, go up the chain of command. The asst. special ed director was just as unhelpful as everyone else so I had to go up to the director.


For writing/OT concerns the OT at DD's school (the only helpful person on the team) suggested:
Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test Visual-Motor Integration (otherwise known as Beery VMI)
5 minute timed writing sample compared to peers
2 sentence far point copy writing sample
Paragraph Computer Copy Writing Sample
Sensory Processing Measure (home and school)--I think because in DD's case she presses down ridiculously hard on the paper and writes over and over everything, plus she has problems with noise
Random Handwriting Sample
BOT2 (Bruiniks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency Fine Motor subtest and Manual Coordination subtests). We have outside results on this already, but she wants to do it again.

They can't diagnose dysgraphia but I told her privately I think that is what the issue is, so she is doing tests that address the issue.

For academic testing they wanted to do the Woodcock Johnson achievement writing cluster but I said they need to add to that or substitute since kids only need to write one sentence at a time, so they are talking about the WIAT writing cluster.


Good luck!

Thanks Aeh and blackcat for the comments :)

Regarding them re-testing her with the same instruments, I agree. I don't understand why they aren't accepting my outside evaluations. I have a quality psych evaluation with autism diagnosis and a hospital OT evaluation diagnosing the motor skill delays. However, they are still doing an "educational autism" evaluation (worthless imo) and their own motor skill evaluation. They are also repeating many of the behavioral questionnaires that I completed with DD10's psychologist. I am worried this is setting the stage for conflict and denying her services yet again.

The laws in the state/county I live in are very unusual. Missouri has some oddly restrictive language for their disability categories. To make matters worse, I live in St. Louis County, and they have their own Special School District. They are justifiably horrible at diagnosing, especially for autism. Everyone pays for outside evaluations, lawyers, and advocates to get access to services for their kids. None of the schools in the county have their own special education teachers, all special ed teachers are employed by the Special School District. It is a bureaucratic nightmare, wrought with communication problems between the schools and the Special School District. I have had significant difficulty navigating the system, and have had DD10's rights violated frequently. Sometimes I think it would just be easier to move out of the county rather than fight these endless battles.

Blackcat,

Thank you for the testing suggestions. I will look into some of these. She has had the Beery VMI and the BOT2 done. The school refused to do a writing assessment because they say she isn't failing any subjects! I fought so hard for this during our meetings, but ultimately they refused. DD10 has a lot of writing task refusal and her writing quality is not what you would expect from someone with her verbal ability and IQ. She is left handed and her penmanship is really awful. They did say that instead of writing help they would just allow her to use a keyboard to type. I may have to follow up on this myself if she continues to have difficulty. Thanks for mentioning the OHI category, I hadn't been considering that, but it could be an option for DD10.

With respect to filing a complaint...In my state, filing a complaint is a legal process and requires a lawyer. We tried mediation as a first pass. I was told by my advocate that filing a complaint with the State means that all discussions with the school will cease, and you will proceed to a hearing with a judge. I am holding filing the complaint as a last ditch effort. If communication breaks down and she is denied services again, it may come to that.

I received a notification of meeting indicating that DD10's eligibility for Special Education services meeting will be on December 2nd. Is there anything I can do prior to this meeting to prepare? They listed a huge number of people attending the meeting. Attending the meeting will be, the school psychologist, school counselor, 2 special education teachers, a representative from the Special School District listed as "Area Coordinator", language diagnostician, occupational therapist, adaptive physical education expert, effective practice specialist (no idea what this is), speech language specialist, physical therapist.

Meanwhile, attending and advocating in support of DD10 will be myself and her special education advocate. Is it typical for so many different people to attend these meetings? I have had DD10's psychologist attend some prior meetings. Do I need to have her present for this meeting? Any advice would be appreciated. I am feeling overwhelmed after getting this letter! I feel like I am walking into an ambush!

My understanding is they do their testing, then conclude a plan is not necessary. Then depending on your district you appeal, have a arbitrator, or file a complaint. One just keeps signing up for further steps until one reaches a final moment when the school/district would have to pay a lot of money (hire outside lawyer or pay for expensive independent testing). At that point they realize a plan Is cheaper and cave. It's not worth it for them before that moment. At least that's how I hear it goes.

Keep up with documenting every moment of unfair struggle by the child, don't get distracted by the meetings/testing/waiting and forget the polite to teacher emails, lest someone say at your appeal next fall "well all your complaints are now 6 months old so child obviously hasn't had problems lately."

Not every system takes that adversarial a position. No comment on this specific school.

The number of participants invited to this meeting is actually quite normal for this kind of eligibility meeting, where there are multiple factors involved with 2e. There are only a couple of roles there which I have not seen routinely in similar situations. Each of the specialists is there to present their piece of the evaluation, which is actually a good thing. Some systems have the chair read through and interpret all the findings, which can be more problematic, as they are not always qualified to interpret every specialist report.

Bring whomever you feel will help you to be most effective in presenting your perspective, and as an advocate for your child. You do not have to notify the school district beforehand about anyone you want to bring with you, although I would highly recommend that you do let them know, as a courtesy, especially if you bring anyone with a JD. Many systems will re-schedule the meeting if you bring an attorney unannounced, as they frequently have policies that the school counsel must be present for any meeting attended by an outside attorney.

ETA: Oh, and some of the invitees are probably there because there are different levels of their specialization. E.g., one of the speech and language people is probably an SLP, which is a higher level than a speech assistant. The SLP probably does the evaluations, while the assistant would do the therapy. One of them may have done the testing, while the other did classroom observations. Especially if all the diagnosticians are housed at a central district office, which usually means they aren't as in touch with what actually happens in classrooms and student daily function. You'll see the same thing with PTs and APE staff, or OTs and COTAs. And there might be a behavior specialist, who could have any of a number of titles.

I'm less pessimistic than Polly at this stage. The long list of attendees tells me that they actually tested in a bunch of areas - that's a good thing. At our services meeting, we had the school SLP, OT, psychologist, special ed teacher, special ed director, and teacher. The OT reported that he "passed" all the tests well enough that he didn't need services. The SLP and the special ed teacher did recommend services, and they offered an IEP with 4 sessions/week of special ed and 1 session/week of "speech" therapy (in quotes because it's actually mostly reading comprehension, not speech per se).

I do think that this is probably a good meeting for your psychologist to attend if you can do it.

Spend a little time on Wrightslaw familiarizing yourself with the terminology, and attend the meeting with a hopeful heart. But don't let them pressure you into signing anything you don't agree with.

Does this mean the school has completed their testing?


I actually read this as a good sign - each of these people plays a different role, and if eligibility *testing* has been completed, and each of these people is attending the meeting, in many districts that would be a sign that your dd is eligible for services and the team will be writing up the draft IEP at the meeting.

If testing hasn't been completed and this is just a meeting to determine whether or not to proceed with testing to determine eligibility, that's a slightly different type of meeting to prepare for - but I don't think that's what's up here. If it is, let us know.

Re what to do to prepare - I would ask for a copy of all test results that the school conducted. It's helpful to ask to have them 5 days in advance so you can review them before the meeting; this might not happen, but at least ask. In our case we received the reports the day before the meeting but even that was helpful - we weren't walking in "blind".



I think this is probably enough, unless you have reason to expect an adversarial meeting. In reality, it's difficult to prepare for bringing in your own expert when you don't have results from the school yet. I wouldn't ask the psychologist or other people to attend at this point, but instead wait and call them in to a follow-up meeting if you realize once the meeting starts that you need them.

Remember that it's ok at any point in time to stop the meeting and say you have a concern and want to reschedule for a time when "professional x" can be present.

There is one other person I'd consider bringing though - either a spouse or a supportive friend, someone who can listen with a separate set of ears. These meetings can be both very overwhelming in the amount of information that is discussed, the discussions can move quickly, and sometimes the meetings can be very emotional for a parent. Having that extra person who is there just to be your support can help. They can take notes, and they can also listen with an independent set of ears.


I really don't think you're walking into an ambush. I think that your school recognizes your dd qualifies for services and they are going to offer up a plan. It might be a great plan, or it might not be. That's where your advocate can really jump in and help. And also remember - you don't have to sign anything at the meeting. You can always wait and sign after you've had time to think about it.

My last piece of prep advice - you might want to record the meeting. There are pros and cons to recording, and policies re what's allowed and what you have to do to get the ok vary from state to state and district to district. I personally usually don't record meetings but instead send a follow-up email to the group of people who attended where I write down a summary of everything that *I* perceived was discussed and we agreed to, and give the group a chance to verify they also agree that's what we discussed and agreed upon. In our situation, I felt that making a request to record would put off the school or raise a concern re why I wanted to record the meetings, but we were already in a very contentious situation with the school trying to fight us tooth and nail every step of the way. I do wish I had recordings of several of our meetings, for two reasons: first reason, there were occasions where something was said in a meeting that was later denied, and second reason, there was just so much info discussed, I would have liked to be able to listen through the meeting again to be sure I hadn't missed anything or forgotten anything after the meeting was over.

Hope some of that helps!

Best wishes,

polarbear

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

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

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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