Well, at least I got prior written notice this time. We have 9 "team members", besides us, the parents. So there will be 11 people. It just seems so ridiculous. Is that normal?
How are we supposed to talk about a concern about how something might be going with a certain "team member" when there are so many people there? For instance I was concerned about the fact that DS's teacher wasn't using the slant board. If I bring something up like that at a meeting (just as example) with upper level admin there (the principal, special ed director, etc), it looks like I'm throwing her under the bus. I don't feel like I can discuss anything openly, whatsoever.

I dunno-- but our high school 504 team four years ago had TEN school staffers in the room (including their legal rep.) and me.

lol yes it's totally normal. I think we have a total of 11 on my DS's team. I don't worry about throwing anyone "under the bus" - you're there to discuss your child and what she needs and what is or is not working in the classroom.

And definitely bring it up because if you don't it never happened and they'll proceed as if teacher has been using the board.

Oh the 11 does not include DH and I... So technically 13 on the team altogether.

Totally normal. 12 is our record, and not even anyone from the district showed like they were supposed to! Do you have the list of attendees? Make sure that the GT teacher is there as well if that person is relevant.

When you go through the accommodations section, you should have a discussion on each one. It's not that hard to bring these issues up at this point "DS reports he doesn't use the slant board. Help me understand why he isn't."

My basic model is: "my child reports to me that..., help me understand what's happening..."

The conversation sequence should stick to the order of the IEP, so you can make certain to set up this discussion by making sure the team has discussions on his weaknesses, including executive function and the physical difficulties in handwriting.

If you've had the prior discussion to this point of executive function, then it will be rather straight forward to point out that remembering to get it himself is equivalent not allowing him the accommodation.

This is perfect and it's also an opportunity to make the accommodation more specific. For example, many times in my situation, when an accommodation wasn't being given, I would say something like Geofizz suggests and the teacher response would often be something like "well he didn't ask for [the accommodation]" which would turn into a productive (although many times unpleasant) discussion of why DS shouldn't need to ask for his accommodation and ultimately resulting a stronger more specifically worded accommodation put in the iep/504 so teachers know exactly, what, how, how often, why and when and accommodation is to be used. Another famous teacher response was often "I didn't notice fatigue," which would lead to me educating everyone on why we don't wait for a teacher to notice fatigue before giving an accommodation and again result in more specific wording so the teacher knows when exactly to give the accommodation. The wording needs to be VERY specific because what I have found if there is any wiggle room the teacher will use that to not give the accommodation. YKWIM?

More than once, the response to not giving an accommodation is "I didn't want to short-change him." I can not tell you how offensive I found that. As if I want to "shortchange my son." As if my wanting him to have access to education is really just me wanting him to be disabled or causing his disability. I can tell you, I think I have heard every excuse as to why a teacher doesn't want to give a needed accommodation. Don't let them put you off with responses and justifications like that.

Agree--

but there is a more pro-social way of stating what you want (and what is, ultimately, RIGHT) here--

Oh, I think that the teacher has plenty to worry about without having to determine minute-by-minute when the accommodation is appropriate and when it isn't needed. Why don't we make it so that {name} doesn't have to spend instructional time making that determination?



Because, see, THEN, it's about you and the rest of the team thinking about the teacher's valuable time, and about not wanting to TAKE more time from, you know, his/her ability to run the classroom effectively. This way you aren't asking the teacher to operate outside of his or her scope of practice, either. After all, teachers are not doctors or physical therapists or anything else. Let them TEACH! (Hurray!)



(Heheheheh... yeah, this is a bit manipulative, but it works. And you never come off looking like "that horrible controlling parent" for bringing it up this way.) You're just trying to... simplify... things. Which may even be true, in some ways-- though that probably requires the kind of big picture look at the situation that some classroom teachers are not very good at. Ultimately, giving a child an necessary accommodation saves EVERYONE in that classroom time and preserves a better instructional setting for all children.


I often like to set this up with "Oh, wow-- I'm really sympathetic to your plight here-- I can see how having to {think it over, make a determination, argue with my child, etc. etc. etc.} is really time-consuming for you. Hmm... how could we make it so that you don't spend all that time... hmm..."

That way you come off as one of the more reasonable and sympathetic/empathetic people in the room. If you can pull it off, it works like a charm.

LOL Nice!

...and 10 to turn the ladder?

IEP team= More than a baseball team, fewer than a football team including its second and third-string players.

Geo's advice is good. Ultimately, it's really hard to tighten up accommodations so that they are foolproof, but it's worth trying.

HK, I use those approaches as well, but generally ifI know for certain the source of the problem. If I'm not 100% sure everyone sees the same problem and interprets it the same, I don't presume anything at the outset, ask for an explanation, and then launch into your sequence...

I think there were 500 people on DS's IEP team. Jk. Seriously, 11 sounds about right. It's just... silly. There is a lot of meeting, discussing, strategizing, red tape analysis, etc, but not much actual change.

Once we started having multiple people from central office attend our meetings we outgrew the school's conference room.

At the last meeting of 1st grade DH, consultant and I were not allowed to enter the room until after the entire school/district team had taken their seats and they didn't leave space at the table for us. Yeah - the 3 of us were given literally about 6" total at the corner of the table. And no, I did not let that pass without comment. Frequent comment.

For 2nd grade they moved us to the media room so everyone had plenty of space to spread out. Worked great until the one meeting they decided maybe we should move back to the conference room. That was the one where the principal stormed out. Only problem was she was stuck on the far side of the table and had to shimmy past a half dozen people to get to the door. It really was unfortunate for her that DH, consultant and I were all in between her and the door as she had her little tantrum.

After that we ALWAYS used the bigger room. Hmmm... Wonder why...

Oh, Pemberley. LOL. Glad you're out of there...

Actually, you may collect a few more as your child gets older. We routinely have more than that. However, each person attending actually has something to report or contribute. All the therapists have to be there: OT, PT and speech. All the different types of teachers should be there: general ed., special ed., gifted ed. The nurse, counselor, social worker and psychologist often needs to be there. An adminstrator should be there along with the IEP chair. Then you have the parents and even the student. On occasion, the aide or other individuals may be invited. The numbers add up.

I have a feeling they are going to want to do more of an eval. Because the teacher is VERY into every single report that we have on DS. I gave her a huge stack of records today and she didn't look happy that I didn't have anything before age 24 months. I hope she doesn't go crazy and try to diagnose him with something he doesn't have. Compare this to other school where they stuffed the neuropsych report into a file and barely looked at it.

Pemberley, what a horrid situation. Every time I complain about something, someone else gets added to the IEP. They know I am onto them and that they are not doing basic legal things. The old school doesn't know how to write a 504 plan for gods sakes. As in they literally DO NOT WRITE THEM. Pretty soon the district superintendent will be at our meetings.

Our GIEP team meetings typically include DH (if he can get time off work) and I plus the principal, primary teacher, gifted teacher, and school psych. If other secondary teachers need to be involved they sort of rotate in and out when someone can cover their class. Our last meeting was primary teacher, gifted teacher and me - that's it. Now that I think about it the school counselor hasn't even ever sat in on a meeting. One would think he/she should be there.

I guess if all the teachers that have DD in class during the day were all at the meeting then there would be about 10-11 total (including DH and I).

Our IEP meeting had the principal, guidance counselor, gifted teacher, school Psych, reading specialist and the teacher, in addition to DH and myself.

Our last IEP meeting had the principal, school psych, special ed teacher, regular teacher, and speech therapist, plus me and DH. The eligibility meeting had all of those plus the OT and the school nurse.