On November 20, 2001, the Department of Public Instruction received a complaint under state and federal special education law from XXXXX against the Stoughton Area School District. This is the departments decision regarding that complaint. The issue is whether the district, during the 2001-2002 school year, failed to provide the following services consistent with the childs IEP: seating accommodations, testing and assignment modifications, and monitoring progress on long-range assignments.
The students IEP requires that she be seated in the back of the classroom when the seating is in rows. In its response to the department, the district acknowledged that, in one class, the student was not seated in the back of the classroom from approximately October 4 through mid-December, 2001. Since then, the student has been seated in the back of every classroom, as required by her IEP. Therefore, the department will not require the district to take additional corrective action in this regard.
The students IEP also requires that she receive "modified and/or alternative assignments and assessments in regular education courses, as determined by her regular education teachers and her learning disabilities case coordinator." The complainant alleges that regular education teachers asked her and the student to request modifications when needed. The district informed the department that modifications were made in some classes and that this issue was also addressed at IEP team meetings held on October 4 and December 14, 2001. The students grandparents and the complainant, respectively, participated in those meetings. As a result, regular education teachers and the case manager are monitoring the students progress more closely to determine her need for modifications on assignments and tests. Therefore, the department concludes that the district is implementing the provision in the IEP related to testing and assignment modifications and no corrective action is necessary.
The complainant also alleges that one regular education teacher failed to monitor the students progress on a long-range assignment. The relevant provisions in the IEP state that the student will receive progress reports from her regular education teachers regarding her "progress on assignments" and that "take home exams and/or projects will be broken down into smaller, more manageable parts . . . to ensure that she is able to finish on time and at a satisfactory level." In its response to the complaint, the district stated that this topic was discussed at the October 4th IEP team meeting and that several assignments since then have been broken down into smaller units. Progress reports by regular education teachers were also emphasized at the December 14th IEP team meeting attended by the complainant. In addition, the case manager will be working closely with each of the students regular education teachers with respect to this requirement of the IEP. The department concludes that the district is implementing these provisions in the IEP, and no corrective action is needed.
This concludes our review of this complaint.
Carolyn Stanford Taylor
Assistant State Superintendent
Division for Learning Support: Equity and Advocacy