Idea Includes Very Specific Guidelines Regarding The Discipl

Idea Includes Very Specific Guidelines Regarding The Discipline Of Stu

Idea Includes Very Specific Guidelines Regarding The Discipline Of Stu

IDEA includes very specific guidelines regarding the discipline of students with disabilities in public school settings. Special education teachers must be knowledgeable of, and adhere to, these guidelines when dealing with any discipline issues regarding students who receive special education services. It is important that the student's disability be taken into consideration when making discipline decisions. Review the case scenario below to inform the assignment that follows. Carrie is a 15â€yearâ€old student with a language impairment.

In particular, she struggles with understanding expressive language (i.e., sharing thoughts, ideas, and feelings completely). Recently, Carrie and the bus driver exchanged words about Carrie's seat on the bus. Carrie proceeded to call the bus driver several inappropriate names. Prior to this incident, Carrie had not exhibited any of these behaviors in her classroom or in any other school environment, and she had not received any disciplinary action in the school year. Following the incident, Carrie's parents received a letter from the principal stating that Carrie would be suspended for 11 school days, has been expelled from riding the school bus for the remainder of the semester, and that, for the remainder of the year, special transportation would be provided to Carrie at the end of the 11â€day suspension.

Carrie's parents have requested that Carrie's IEP team gather in order to complete a functional behavioral assessment, develop a behavioral intervention plan, and conduct a manifestation determination review. Further, they object to Carrie having special transportation. Carrie's IEP indicates that she is to ride the “general education†bus.

Paper For Above instruction

The case of Carrie illuminates the complex intersection of discipline and special education law, particularly under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). When addressing disciplinary actions involving students with disabilities, IDEA mandates a careful review process, especially when a student's behavior is misinterpreted or linked to their disability. This paper will explore the legal considerations surrounding the disciplinary decision to suspend Carrie, the procedural steps following a manifestation determination, and the implications of her transportation accommodations.

Under IDEA, behavioral issues of students with disabilities must be handled in a manner that respects their individual needs and legal rights. If a student's behavior is determined to be a manifestation of their disability, the school must follow specific procedures, including conducting a manifestation determination review. This process assesses whether the behavior is directly related to the student’s disability or the school's failure to implement the IEP (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). In Carrie's case, given her language impairment, it is plausible that her inappropriate behavior was linked to her disability, especially considering her recent conduct history and the context of her expressive language difficulties.

The creation of a flowchart to depict the disciplinary pathways following a manifestation determination is essential for clarity. On one pathway, if the misconduct is found to be a manifestation of Carrie's disability, the school is generally prohibited from applying certain disciplinary measures that would remove her from her educational setting for more than 10 days. Instead, they must provide appropriate behavioral interventions and continue to educate her in the least restrictive environment (LRE). If the misconduct is not linked to her disability, then the school can enforce disciplinary measures such as suspension or expulsion according to state law and school policies.

Given the current details, the next steps involve completing the manifest determination review, as requested by Carrie's parents. If the behavior is found to be linked to her disability, the school must develop or revise her behavioral intervention plan (BIP) and consider placement options that accommodate her needs, including whether she should continue riding the general education bus or require specialized transportation. Additionally, her parents' objections to the current transportation arrangements must be addressed by the IEP team, possibly leading to revisions that better support her access to education without unnecessary removal from her typical setting.

In the scenario provided, legal issues arise with the school's decision to suspend Carrie for 11 days and to prohibit her from using the bus, especially considering her disability and the objections of her parents. IDEA emphasizes that disciplinary measures should not be solely punitive but should focus on positively modifying behavior and ensuring access to education (Freeman & Alant, 2019). Moreover, denial of transportation might be viewed as a failure to provide FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education), potentially leading to legal challenges from her parents, especially if it effectively denies access to her educational program and violates her rights.

Legal precedents such as Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) reaffirm that the education of students with disabilities must be individualized and equitable. Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Education's 2017 guidance clarifies that discipline procedures cannot be discriminatory or deny FAPE arbitrarily. Schools must meticulously document all steps taken during disciplinary actions and demonstrate compliance with IDEA standards, including conducting manifest determination reviews within the required timelines.

In addition to IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination based on disability and requires schools to provide accommodations that ensure access and equal opportunity. Denying transportation without a proper assessment or ignoring parent objections could violate Section 504 rights, especially if it results in limited access to education (Kavale & Forness, 2000). Furthermore, case decisions such as Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education (1989) have underscored the importance of procedural safeguards, especially when behavioral interventions involve disciplinary measures that isolate or exclude students with disabilities.

Besides legal compliance, ethical considerations demand that educators recognize the importance of behavioral assessments tailored to the student's specific needs. Conducting a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) as requested by Carrie's parents will help identify the antecedents, behaviors, and consequences that maintain her behavior. Developing a comprehensive BIP based on FBA findings will establish strategies for proactive management and skill-building interventions, which are vital in reducing inappropriate behaviors and promoting positive social interactions (Duda et al., 2020).

In conclusion, the legal framework surrounding the discipline of students with disabilities, exemplified by Carrie’s case, necessitates a careful, individualized approach that respects her rights under IDEA and Section 504. The school’s decision to suspend Carrie and alter her transportation arrangements without thorough assessments and adherence to procedural safeguards risks legal violations and undermines her educational access. Moving forward, the IEP team must conduct the mandated assessments, including the manifestation determination, and collaborate with Carrie's parents to create a behavioral support plan that addresses her unique needs while complying with federal law.

References

• Daniel R.R. v. State Bd. of Educ., 874 F.2d 1036 (4th Cir. 1989).
• Duda, M.A., Tincani, M., & Delgado, C. (2020). Behavioral interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of Behavioral Education, 29(2), 242-259.
• Freeman, J., & Alant, E. (2019). Disciplinary policies in special education: Balancing safety and rights. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 32(3), 134-143.
• Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (2000). Social skills deficit and emotional disturbance: Issues and implications. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(4), 228-237.
• U.S. Department of Education. (2017). A guide to the individualized education program. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482 (2004).
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446.
• Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982).
• Daniel R.R. v. State Bd. of Educ., 874 F.2d 1036 (4th Cir. 1989).
• Shogren, K., Wehmeyer, M. L., & Basham, R. (2020). Ethical considerations in behavior management: Implications for practice. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 31(4), 209-218.