Re: Republic attack on the call-in day

[Guest guest]

Hi

Boy this ticks me off ........ Sara's teachers even agree that this is not a

good move. I would love to send our politions Sara's IEP and ask them how

they would plan on implementing it without the objectives and what if it was

their child.

I think not having the steps to meet the goals (objectives) is the scariest

part in this mess (concerning Sara). As a goal/objective writer Sara will

have soooooooo many broke down goals .... Way more paper work then she has

now if this goes through and more evaluations to write the PLOPs. All parents

will really have to be involved and educate themselves in the goal writing

and making sure they have all of the Evals to write the PLOPs. Can we say

money-time-money-time

Kathy mom to Sara 11 ...... if i see any loop hole Im pushing it heehee

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 7:37:50 PM Central Daylight Time,

b4alltoday@... writes:

> ........ Sara's teachers even agree that this is not a

> good move. I would love to send our politions Sara's IEP and ask them how

> they would plan on implementing it without the objectives and what if it

> was

> their child.

>

Hi Kathy,

Please not what they are doing, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DROP BENCHMARKS, it's just

an option for parents WHO WANT TO.

life is about choices and yeah some can get by with a 3 yr IEP and no

benchmarks, espeically if their child is capable of being graded using reg.

curric...my daughter went to school with a girl who's mother was a drug adict

and used while carrying her, she wanted to do reg. work AND get graded that

way, she had an awful memory, courtesy of her mom's addiction, but she really

didn't need benchmarks, just goals and accomodations. For her the

accomodations like extra time and such were much more important the the

benchmarks. Now with kids with more serious delays, yes, benchmarks should

be used. But if you look at some of the kids that are really, really

delayed, what purpose does it serve to have to have a meeting every year to

discuss the same objectives. Those can be discussed on a P/T level and the

parent can decide if a meeting is necessary to add or change them.

If Sara is being ascessed by an alternative method (her benchmarks) then she

can continue to be accessed in that way. Since she is not doing grade level

work then to me she would not be accessed in the same way as the other kids.

This law is just about alternatives and giving parents other options. Many

do feel that IEP's are a pain in the postier, espeically if their child is

actually being accessed like all the others. You have the right to continue

as you are so there isn't anything wrong with the bill. IMO :-)

Joy

Fiction: “Paperwork reduction provisions such as the 3-year Individualized

Education Plan (IEP) and elimination of short-term objectives will remove

accountability for children and parents.â€

FACT: Proposals such as the 3-year IEP are options for states, and options

for parents - options caring parents and paperwork-weary teachers alike

believe the law should allow for students with disabilities. If a parent

would prefer to have an annual IEP, the law continues to guarantee that

right. The 3-year IEP, if agreed to by the parent and the school, would

maintain critical individualized education to children with special needs

while reducing complex and duplicative paperwork. Further, if a parent

decides the 3-year IEP is not working, the parent can simply ask to return to

the annual IEP - and they don’t have to wait until the 3-year IEP is

completed.

The elimination of benchmarks and short-term objectives will not take place

until the 2005-2006 school year - because beginning in 2005 all parents will

receive report cards from schools showing academic progress indicators. Until

that time, IEPs will continue to contain short-term objectives and benchmarks

to ensure academic progress is being made. After that time, those students

who are being assessed using alternate assessment may continue to have

benchmarks and short-term objectives.

The crushing paperwork burden associated with the IDEA is taking teachers out

of the classroom and away from the children who need to be taught. Proposed

reductions in unnecessary paperwork are designed to increase academic results

by allowing the teachers to spend more time teaching rather than filling out

complicated and often-unnecessary paperwork.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 7:37:50 PM Central Daylight Time,

b4alltoday@... writes:

> All parents

> will really have to be involved and educate themselves in the goal writing

> and making sure they have all of the Evals to write the PLOPs.

>

>

Oh and Kathy, it's always been this way. :-) but the parents who really

care they'll continue to educate themselves, just as many who come here are

starting to DO.......the others will just continue to do as they do now and

really won't give a crap anyway.

BTW, don't you already do all that.....all you have to do is continue on as

you are already doing, hehe. :-)

Joy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 7:58:12 PM Central Daylight Time, knm@...

writes:

> You might find the following to be interesting reading....

>

>

> Hi!

>

> Interesting is one word. A crock of shit is another. Compassionate

> conservativism my ass! jmho of course.

>

> Take Care,

>

>

> Kent

>

Whatever. to each his own. :-)

Joy

[Guest guest]

This is really dirty politics. Hard to fight against too. They

undermine everything we try to do. What next? Jessie

[Guest guest]

Not all parents participate at lesser levels because they don't care. They

are overwhelmed, they are surviving. They are dependent on schools to do the

right thing. They trust the people involved in their child's education

process. And they should be able to.

Cheryl in VA

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay

any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any

foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty. - F. Kennedy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 9:01:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

JTesmer799@... writes:

> But if you look at some of the kids that are really, really

> delayed, what purpose does it serve to have to have a meeting every year to

>

> discuss the same objectives.

No child should have the same objectives year after year, that's the law.

They should have individualized objectives suited for them that they can

ACCOMPLISH within one year's time. AND there are very few students that meet

the severe and profound type of definition ... so why change the entire law

if lawmakers thought that would benefit only the small minority?

One of the main functions of IDEA 97 was to STOP the same goals being put on

IEPS year after year ... and it wasn't just students that were severe and

profound that this was happening to.

Cheryl in VA

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay

any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any

foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty. - F. Kennedy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 9:01:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

JTesmer799@... writes:

> The 3-year IEP, if agreed to by the parent and the school, would

> maintain critical individualized education to children with special needs

> while reducing complex and duplicative paperwork.

I wonder how many pages a 3 year IEP will have? I know how many one for

my child would have ..... much more paperwork than an annual IEP!

Cheryl in VA

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay

any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any

foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty. - F. Kennedy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 10:43:24 PM Central Daylight Time, Wildwards

writes:

> No child should have the same objectives year after year, that's the law.

> They should have individualized objectives suited for them that they can

> ACCOMPLISH within one year's time. AND there are very few students that

> meet the severe and profound type of definition ... so why change the

> entire law if lawmakers thought that would benefit only the small minority?

>

>

>

And what's wrong with giving parents the CHOICE of how often they want to

write the goals. If they feel three years is often enough based on their

knowledge of THEIR child then I say give them that right. The whole law is

not changed, everyone still has the right to yearly IEP's if they choose, I

sure know that I wouldn't change that regarding 's IEP.

Joy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 10:43:24 PM Central Daylight Time, Wildwards

writes:

> One of the main functions of IDEA 97 was to STOP the same goals being put on

> IEPS year after year ... and it wasn't just students that were severe and

> profound that this was happening to.

> Cheryl in VA

>

>

No it was happening to mine. sigh.

Yeah like I said I've been there and become more educated, it'll happen to

those who get frustrated enough and really care how their child is educated.

Trust in teachers is fairly low in this household.

But I still see nothing wrong with choice. The biggie is going to be

ensuring that your states information stresses that parents have the choice

between yearly or every three years and continues to state that parents can

call an IEP if they feel the need.

Joy

[Guest guest]

Not to mention that they are wearing us down. For 12 years plus I have been

struggling, fighting for rights, pushing, advocating, etc. I am soooo tired

and I sorta know what to do and how to go about getting what amanada needs.

Cheryl, you say this very well. Here, school systems tell you nothing. We

all have to find out everything on our own or with a little help from the

likes of this group.

In amanda's elementary school, i started a group for parents of spec needs

kids that was very successful. We got lots of resources and support from it.

I dont usually make comparisons between children, but I am noticing that my

son, sorta finds his own way. I send him to school with little to worry

about - he does his work, he gets what he needs, he comes home, has friends,

hes fine.

But as you all know, with a special needs child, it never ends. Never.

sits down and does the HW and someone sits with amanda for another 2

hours. Yesterday she didnt know how much a nickel was worth. SIGH....

I havent felt so worn out as I do this year, and thats with not working.

~ Mom to 12 DS and Diabetes Type 1 and 8 NY

[Guest guest]

<Not all parents participate at lesser levels because they don't care. They

are overwhelmed, they are surviving. They are dependent on schools to do the

right thing. They trust the people involved in their child's education

process. And they should be able to.>

Thank you, Cheryl, for saying this. The professors at my university

constantly tell the preservice teachers that there has never been a parent

they've met that " doesn't care " about their child. I think it is important

for all to know that, not only for future educators.

Jackie, Mom to 15ds, 12, and Bradley 9

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 7:00:43 PM Central Standard Time, JTesmer799

writes:

> After that time, those students who are being assessed using alternate

> assessment may continue to have benchmarks and short-term objectives.

Hi Joy

The advocates here say benchmarks will only be used for kids who have the

portfolios done --> same kids who don't take the state assessment tests

(Tcaps here) now in Sara's case she takes a modified state test (Tcaps)

soooooooo the argument will be there, state mandated assessment test or

portfolio

Kathy mom to Sara 11 .......... see this website is another way they have

misinformed all, the proposed bill tells a lot more

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 11:37:33 PM Central Daylight Time,

heather_schulte@... writes:

> . But my

> biggest concern about this is that there will be parents out there that do

> not realize they can ask for a 1-year IEP. Many schools will not tell

> them,

> or simple won't agree to 1 year IEP's if they are not mandated. 3-year

> IEP's are not a good choice for many of our children.

>

This is where parents need to again eduate themselves, we already have to do

it so word of mouth will get that fact around, and I'm sure that the

advocates and lawyers will make sure that it's put in the parental rights or

something like that. You know those pieces of paper that you probably have

enough of to paper a small room.

If you've read this list much at all in the last few months you have to have

a good idea that the schools aready are not talking about LRE and it makes

parents who finally find out about it very angry. They aren't going to

change over this either.

If it's a choice it's not mandated, if you share that fact and the people you

share it with share that fact then more people will question a school trying

to pull a fast one, course that doesnt' stop them for trying for placement

before the IEP is written.

Joy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 9:43:24 PM Central Standard Time, Wildwards

writes:

> But if you look at some of the kids that are really, really

> delayed, what purpose does it serve to have to have a meeting every year to

> discuss the same objectives.

HI

I am advocating for one of those " really really delayed kids " and the main

reason is the same old goals and objectives ........ ei. Pushing chair up to

the table .... I convinced the Mom that this is not going to happen at this

time and lets write something she can succeed in. Another thing is the

classroom environment can change year to year ... been there done that. Lets

discuss behavior, we have had 4 behavior meetings just this yr. to discuss

new behaviors sooooooo meeting every three years is a crock and thank

goodness this is one of the things we do have a say in.

Kathy mom to Sara 11 ........... think about 3 years and how much change your

child has made in 3 yrs, Sara changes monthly lol

[Guest guest]

on 5/2/03 7:29 PM, RSYOSH@... at RSYOSH@... wrote:

You might find the following to be interesting reading....

Hi!

Interesting is one word. A crock of shit is another. Compassionate

conservativism my ass! jmho of course.

Take Care,

Kent

Kent Moreno

Rt 1 Box 128-X

Burlington, WV 26710

knm@...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 10:07:22 PM Central Standard Time,

JTesmer799@... writes:

> And what's wrong with giving parents the CHOICE of how often they want to

> write the goals. If they feel three years is often enough based on their

> knowledge of THEIR child then I say give them that right. The whole law is

> not changed, everyone still has the right to yearly IEP's if they choose, I

> sure know that I wouldn't change that regarding 's IEP.

>

> Joy

HI Joy lol again

We have to remember this is a bundled package law, some of the points might

not affect us but they do affect others.

Kathy mom to Sara 11

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 11:39:44 PM Central Daylight Time,

b4alltoday@... writes:

> The advocates here say benchmarks will only be used for kids who have the

> portfolios done --> same kids who don't take the state assessment tests

> (Tcaps here) now in Sara's case she takes a modified state test (Tcaps)

> soooooooo the argument will be there, state mandated assessment test or

> portfolio

>

So the argument they present is " will be " .......why not the argument 'may

be " ?

Worst case scenario? It will only be if you and the advocates let your TN

legislature get by with writing the state regs that way. even then it might

be questionable.

Joy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 10:58:15 PM Central Standard Time,

_Schulte@... writes:

> But Joy, what about those parents out there that don't have time to learn

> everything there is to know about their rights. Wasn't that point

> mentioned already? " ...Not all parents participate at a lesser level

> because they don't care. " We should just let the children of parents who

> don't hear about 1-year IEP's by " word of mouth " fend for themselves and be

> left behind?

>

> Schulte

HI you are absolutely right.

Ive watched our county sugar coat so many things to convince parents of false

truths. One of Sara's best friends goes into the reg ed class unsupported, I

asked the Mom why and she said her child didn't need any supports .........

that the school told her that. Well I am at the school all the time and I see

what's going on .... this is false information, now mind you imagine what

they will tell parents who don't know the law and who trust the system? if

this gets passed

Kathy mom to Sara 11

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 11:54:40 PM Central Daylight Time, B4alltoday

writes:

> Kathy mom to Sara 11 ........... think about 3 years and how much change

> your child has made in 3 yrs, Sara changes monthly lol

When you speak of misinformation, the information that implied/stated that

the every 3 year IEP would be the only option was in itself misinformation.

If you want trust you need to be up front, are the advocates misinforming

about that? From all the talk around here and other sped sites I got the

idea that every 3 yrs would be the only option, that is misinformation to me.

If they aren't misreading the law and the gov web site is stating a lie then

then point that out. Either way one is misinforming, who is it? This

list is where I got all the alerts on 3 yr IEP's. Perhaps I misread the

alerts and so did alot of other people?

Joy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 11:03:28 PM Central Standard Time, JTesmer799

writes:

>

> >> The advocates here say benchmarks will only be used for kids who have the

>> portfolios done --> same kids who don't take the state assessment tests

>> (Tcaps here) now in Sara's case she takes a modified state test (Tcaps)

>> soooooooo the argument will be there, state mandated assessment test or

>> portfolio

>>

>

> So the argument they present is " will be " .......why not the argument 'may

> be " ?

>

> Worst case scenario? It will only be if you and the advocates let your TN

> legislature get by with writing the state regs that way. even then it

> might be questionable.

>

> Joy

HI Joy

Well, if your counting on the state legislators to come up with something

better for our kids in state regs, forget it lol now below is the actual

wording of the bill, if this is made Federal law then I don't see where

states will change it for the better.

Kathy mom to Sara 11

A BILL

To reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and for other

purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress assembled,

`(d) INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION PROGRAMS-

`(1) DEFINITIONS- As used in this title:

`(A) INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION PROGRAM-

`(i) IN GENERAL- The term `individualized education program' or `IEP' means a

written statement for each child with a disability that is developed,

reviewed, and revised in accordance with this section and that includes--

`(I) a statement of the child's present levels of academic achievement,

including--

`(cc) until the beginning of the 2005-2006 school year, a description of

benchmarks or short-term objectives, except in the case of children with

disabilities who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement

standards, a description of benchmarks or short-term objectives shall

continue to be included;

Now this " except in the case of children with disabilities who take alternate

assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards, " is meant for the

kids who dont take state assessments.

Kathy mom to Sara 11

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/2003 11:22:27 PM Central Standard Time, JTesmer799

writes:

> When you speak of misinformation, the information that implied/stated that

> the every 3 year IEP would be the only option was in itself misinformation.

>

>

> If you want trust you need to be up front, are the advocates misinforming

> about that? From all the talk around here and other sped sites I got the

> idea that every 3 yrs would be the only option, that is misinformation to

> me. If they aren't misreading the law and the gov web site is stating a

> lie then then point that out. Either way one is misinforming, who is it?

> This list is where I got all the alerts on 3 yr IEP's. Perhaps I misread

> the alerts and so did alot of other people?

>

> Joy

HI

Now I heard it wasn't mandatory and I think from here the 3 yr. IEP

It boils down to another area of argument, who knows best the school or

parents??? and I foresee a lot of cases going into due process over this,

what a waste

Kathy mom to Sara 11

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/2/03 11:57:52 PM Central Daylight Time,

heather_schulte@... writes:

> But Joy, what about those parents out there that don't have time to learn

> everything there is to know about their rights. Wasn't that point

> mentioned already?

You know, when you have achild you sometimes end up with no time. You end up

staying up late and sleep deprived.

Two of the women I work with are involved in sped. one has 5 kids, the

youngest is only 8 months old and has a pretty basic idea of what her child

is entitled to. The other asks and has been informed by me and a nurse on

her station what her youngest son (15?) who has an IEP is entitled to get an

eduation. (he really needs books on tape since he has reading difficulties

and oral tests) The nurse has stated that she'd go to an IEP meeting to help

her, I've told her that I'd come along with her if she liked, she chose no

help, her son continues to struggle with getting his assignments done even

tho he has an IEP. Many people are like that. And she only has him left at

home so should have plently of time to get informed.

you will get informed if you really want to from what the experience that

I've had with others.

joy

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/3/03 12:11:08 AM Central Daylight Time,

b4alltoday@... writes:

> . this is false information, now mind you imagine what

> they will tell parents who don't know the law and who trust the system? if

> this gets passed

>

Actually Kathy i did state that they(schools)won't inform, I said somthing

somewhere that they don't do that with LRE, as we read all the time here, and

they aren't going to do that with this. Why do you think the old trusting me

does not trust them? LOL I look at all this as needing to become informed

and take responsiblity on our own it's always been that way.

BTW, why is this called an attack on the call in day? All they did was

inform their members as to what they were putting into the bill and what it

is meant it to mean. If nothing else it's in a record now so they can't back

out of the true meaning. LOL

joy

[Guest guest]

I keep hearing that parents can still get 1-year IEP's if they want them.

In fact, that is how Jim Ryun responded to my letter about HR 1350. But my

biggest concern about this is that there will be parents out there that do

not realize they can ask for a 1-year IEP. Many schools will not tell them,

or simple won't agree to 1 year IEP's if they are not mandated. 3-year

IEP's are not a good choice for many of our children.

Schulte

> And what's wrong with giving parents the CHOICE of how often they want to

> write the goals. If they feel three years is often enough based on their

> knowledge of THEIR child then I say give them that right. The whole law

is

> not changed, everyone still has the right to yearly IEP's if they choose,

I

> sure know that I wouldn't change that regarding 's IEP.

>

> Joy

>

>

>