More than 8 million students with disabilities are served by our nation’s public schools. Since its creation in 1980, the U.S. Department of Education has provided expertise, funding, and enforcement for federal laws that provide protections and services for students with disabilities.

These laws, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), initially passed in 1975, established civil rights protections for students with disabilities and put in place procedures and safeguards to ensure that each of these students has access to an education tailored to their specific needs.

Recent actions taken by the federal government are a direct threat to federal ability to carry out both Section 504 and IDEA. These actions include:

• The elimination of entire departments that oversee special education. Without the staff of these departments, few, if any, experts in special education remain in the federal government.
• Proposals of reassigning special education to the Department of Health and Human Services(HHS). HHS is not an appropriate placement for special education oversight. HHS is equipped to cure disease, not to educate. We demand that the oversight of special education remain with the Department of Education.

If carried out, these actions would irreparably harm the students with disabilities who benefit from these laws.

A group of national organizations, including The Arc of the United States, are collaborating in efforts to preserve federal protections for students with disabilities. ADVOCACYDENVER is supporting this effort and encourages you to do so as well. A group of national organizations, including The Arc of the United States, are collaborating in efforts to preserve federal protections for students with disabilities. ADVOCACYDENVER is supporting this effort and encourages you to do so as well.

What Can You Do?

• Contact your members of Congress and ask for the complete rehiring of special education staffing at the Department of Education and oppose any efforts to move federal oversight of special education to HHS. The Arc U.S. provides this webpage that easily allows you to do this. 
• Inform yourself and take action. Collaborating organizations hosted a Town Hall on this issue on November 4, which you can watch here. They have also created a toolkit that contains position statements from participating organizations and other steps parents, educators, and other advocacy organizations can take to support this effort, including contacting other elected officials. 
• Spread the word. Tell others about what’s happening to federal support for special education and ask them to join you in this effort. Share this newsletter with others as well. If you use social media, consider posting about this issue.

“For 50 years, IDEA has had strong bipartisan support, and we are counting on Congress to ensure these firings are reversed. If not, the firings will have a devastating impact on babies, toddlers, and all children with disabilities, as well as on adults with disabilities who depend on these offices for employment supports. We must act now  to reverse these harmful firings!” — National Downs Syndrome Congress

Policy Perspective is a publication of ADVOCACYDENVER. If you have any questions, please contact Paul Baumann, Policy Outreach Specialist, at pbaumann@advocacydenver.org or 303.974.2535.

The post ACTION ALERT: Preserve Protections for Students with Disabilities appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

On January 17, 2023, AdvocacyDenver filed a complaint against the Denver Public Schools (DPS) with the Colorado Department of Education alleging violations of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.  The complaint was filed on behalf of a family whose child had not received speech/language services (SLP) required by the Individualized Education Program (IEP) beginning August 2022 to the date that the complaint was filed.  In addition, AdvocacyDenver provided a list of other elementary schools where children were not receiving the IEP SLP services.

It is important to note that the parents exhausted other administrative remedies before reaching out to AdvocacyDenver, they worked with the school leader and left messages for central administration special education managers and directors in October and November.  The school leader reached out to district leadership and contacted The Children’s Hospital to see if the school could contract for services.  Central administration first spoke to the parents after receiving notice of the State Complaint.  The district offered to pay for a list of services contingent on the family withdrawing any pending complaints.  The family was concerned about their child, but they paused and thought about the larger school community and declined the offer.   The parents brought testimony to the Board of Education, organized a letter writing campaign; the shero and hero when forwarding the issues and demanding resolution were the parents. 

The complaint was accepted for investigation.  The district was provided with a list of interrogatories and an opportunity to respond.  District counsel submitted an admission to the allegations.  March 18, 2023, the State Complaint officer issued a decision and concluded that the district had failed to implement the IEP for the named student; this violation resulted in a denial of a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

Conclusion to Allegation No. 2 (systemic complaint):

District failed to implement the IEPs of over 1,000 Students from January 17, 2022 to present, by failing to provide them with the SLP minutes required by their IEPs, in violation of 34 C.F.R. § 300.323. This violation resulted in denials of FAPE.

The decision requires that the district submit a corrective action plan and provides a timeline for directives outlined in the decision.  AdvocacyDenver expects that the district will follow directives provided by the State Complaints Officer and IEP teams will meet with parents/guardians to discuss compensatory services (services that will place the child in the same position they would have been in if there had not been an interruption/denial of services).  

The decision provides the district an opportunity to consider the issues leading up to the complaint.  We hope the decision sparks the district’s thinking about staffing issues that are not specific to the pandemic, but rather speak to the culture of the district.  Over the past decade AdvocacyDenver observed the exodus of talented teachers (general and special education) and related service providers.  Superintendent Boasberg closed/redesigned neighborhood schools and bid farewell to the staff.  Boasberg cut millions of dollars (7, 3, 5, 17) out of the special education budget.  As caseloads, workloads and culture became impossible, some providers left the field, or moved to other school districts.  That same Superintendent forwarded a ruthless business culture that devalues staff and uncertainty is the norm.

The current Superintendent and leadership have an opportunity to forward a different culture.  When onboarding staff they should not only welcome the new member of the team, but assign a skilled mentor to support them in learning about and navigating a complicated system.  Negotiations with the Denver Classroom Teachers Association (DCTA) should include an accurate workload formula for each group of providers.  Weight should be given to the special education teachers and providers such as speech language pathologists that work with our youngest learners.  Consideration should be given to the fact that preschool and elementary school providers are implementing a multi-tiered service system/response to intervention and completing initial evaluations.  We look to professional staff to teach the child compensatory skills so that that eventually that child no longer needs specialized services.  Special education should not be a life sentence.  Weight should be given to the fact that many elementary providers are expected to serve students at multiple schools; school assignments should be clustered, a stipend provided for working in multiple buildings and a stipend for working with our youngest learners.  

Again, the current Superintendent and leadership have an opportunity to forward a different culture, where staff is valued and DPS becomes the district of choice for employment.  Such a change could result in better outcomes for all DPS students.

The post DPS Failed to Provide Speech Services to Over 1000 Students appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

It is important to know where you have been in order to know where you are going. The student pictured is a client. He is a Denver Public School (DPS) student, diagnosed with autism. In 2011 the student was assigned to an affective needs (AN) center program. The AN program is said to be designed for students with emotional disabilities, not students with autism, intellectual disabilities, other health impairments (e.g. ADHD) or other disabilities.

Each day, the bus ride home for the student was 45 minutes. One day he started crying “it’s too long”, got out of his seat and kicked the paraprofessional on the bus. The bus was minutes from the parents’ home, but the driver turned the bus around and returned to the school. The principal called the police and then the parents. When the parents arrived, their young child was in handcuffs. The police said that they could not take the handcuffs off, they loaded him into the police car, and because of his young age, drove him the hospital; they removed the handcuffs once he was in the care of a doctor. AdvocacyDenver worked with the family and district and the student was moved to a program designed for children with autism.

In 2011 and today a disproportionate number of Black male students are placed in the DPS AN center programs. AdvocacyDenver tried to work for systemic change with each superintendent and each special education director. We saw momentum in 2020 when the District initiated Project DISRUPT as a means to dismantle institutionalized racism. In the fall of 2020, DPS forwarded the following Problem Statement to district/school staff:

Affective Needs Center based programming is one of our most glaring examples of institutionalized racism with Denver Public Schools, which disproportionately impacts Black male students. In order to break historical and contemporary patterns of inequity, this system needs to be abolished, and we must reimagine how we serve Black students with known and suspected disabilities by designing and committing to the implementation of anti-racist, anti-ableist policies, structures, and mindsets.

The special education director promised systemic change. The project was established in 2020 and shut down June 2021. No steps were taken to resolve admitted issues of race and disability discrimination. Then and now the district admits that Black students are consistently overrepresented in AN center programs. AdvocacyDenver exhausted school and administrative remedies to try to resolve issues. AdvocacyDenver forwarded and resolved formal and informal complaints on behalf of individual students; however, outcomes did not result in systemic change.

On August 2, 2021 AdvocacyDenver filed a complaint of discrimination with the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. The complaint was accepted, the investigation is pending.

On March 24, 2022, AdvocacyDenver filed a state-level complaint against Denver Public Schools on behalf of parents of Black students identified as children with a disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) and placed in affective needs (“AN”) programs. The State Complaints Officer determined that AdvocacyDenver identified five systemic allegations subject to the jurisdiction of the state-level complaint process under the IDEA and its implementing regulations. Due to the significant number of identified Students and the voluminous documentation required to resolve the systemic allegations, the State Complaints Officer extended the 60-day investigation timeline due to exceptional circumstances. The decision was issued September 7, 2022.

• Conclusion to Allegation No. 1: District systematically failed to conduct comprehensive evaluations or make appropriate eligibility determinations for Students, in violation of 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.304 and 300.306(c).
• Conclusion to Allegation No. 2: District systematically failed to educate Students in their least restrictive environment, in violation of 34 C.F.R. § 300.114. District also systematically failed to ensure Students could participate in nonacademic and extracurricular activities to the greatest extent possible, in violation of and 300.116 and ECEA Rule 4.03(8)(a) and 300.117.
• Conclusion to Allegation No. 3: District included Parents in discussions about placement changes, consistent 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.116(a)(1) and 300.327. However, District systemically failed to issue prior written notice of placement changes, in violation of 34 C.F.R. § 300.503.
• Conclusion to Allegation No. 4: District failed to ensure teachers at two AN programs and (District) Facility School possessed required certifications and licenses, in violation of 34 C.F.R. § 300.156 and ECEA Rule 3.03.
• Conclusion to Allegation No. 5: District systematically failed to develop, review, and revise IEPs tailored to Students’ individualized needs, in violation of 34 C.F.R §§ 300.320(a)(2), 300.324(a), and 300.324(b)(1)(ii)(A).

The State Complaints Officer provided the district a long list of corrective actions and the timeline for completing those actions. The Decision, when published can be found at: https://www.cde.state.co.us/spedlaw/decisions

The decision is far reaching and provides a long list of corrective actions including training facilitated by Colorado Department of Education to all special education leadership (e.g. Executive Director, Directors, Managers or any other central District staff who support building leaders at schools with AN programs), school building leaders at with AN programs, AN Program Teachers, Facility School Teachers and School Psychologists and Social Workers who support these programs.

No doubt, the Superintendent will honor the order issued by the State Complaints Officer. We are all lifelong learners, and we are certain that the training will be welcomed by many; the training will offer staff additional tools needed to appropriately serve marginalized communities of learners. Now that we have talked about where we have been, looking forward, professional development cannot and should not be a one-time activity. Denver Public Schools Superintendent has the opportunity to make a decision that will serve students well into the future. The Superintendent can honor school autonomy on some matters, but firmly forward a culture/procedures that demand professional learning and compliance when it comes to Individuals with Disabilities Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Denver Public Schools’ Consent Decree.

The post Students Prevail in Systemic Complaint Against Denver Public Schools appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

The following concerns and recommendations are submitted on behalf of students with disabilities who are enrolled in the Denver Public Schools.  Concerns, opinions and recommendations were provided to the Department of Special Education and Student Equity and Opportunity but the staff has been firm forwarding procedures and timelines.

March 2020 all students were sent home on an extended break.  Students were moved to remote instruction.  This had a significant impact on all learners, including students with disabilities.  For students with disabilities, the Individualized Education Program team (which includes the parent) met and developed a Contingency Plan.  An Individualized Education Program (IEP) and a Contingency Plan are not the same.  An IEP is an offer of a free, appropriate public education, a Contingency remote learning plan outlines what would be provided during remote learning as a result of the public health emergency.

Remote instruction was again provided to all learners at the start of the 2020-2021 school year.  Youngest learners and a small number of middle and high school students, with the most significant disabilities (approximately 10%) were offered in person, hybrid instruction.  In person instruction for middle and high school learners was staggered and some learners were not offered a hybrid schedule until February/March 2021.  April 2021 Special Education Teachers and Related Service providers were given a directive to determine compensatory services and provide parent with Prior Written Notice regarding compensatory services.  The timeline for completing and submitting information is May 15, 2021.  The District reports that staff is receiving additional pay because these decisions are completed/made outside of the work day.

Compensatory services are educational services that are awarded to students with disabilities to make up for services that they lost because of a school district’s failure to provide an appropriate educational placement and/or services.  Advocates and parents do not fault school or the District for the pandemic, but the pandemic does not waive procedures that require the IEP team (of which the parent is a member) to determine compensatory services that will be provided to make up for services missed during COVID 19.  Compensatory services are designed to place the student in the same position he or she would have been in if there had not been an interruption in learning.  The district’s procedures are flawed:

• Educators are making decisions outside of an IEP meeting, without the parents;
• Parents are provided a Prior Written Notice of the decision and parents are not informed of the process, definition of terms, or that they have a right and a definitive timeline to disagree with the decision;
• Some students have not returned to school and no student is participating in pre-pandemic level of general education and special education programming/services.  It is premature to calculate educational harm and make a final offer for recovery services; 
• Compensatory/recovery services/instruction have not been identified for neurotypical peers, instead the District will gather information in relation to individual learners and will make decisions once schools are able to return to a normal schedule.  
• The immediate timeline for determining compensatory services discriminates against students with disabilities. Attached is a copy of the IEP Recovery Worksheet.  Although the worksheet asks for parent and Local Education Agency (LEA) signature, parents are not provided with a copy of the worksheet or other supporting documentation.  The worksheet asks that the team identify Tier 1 (general education) Tier 2 and Tier 3 recovery services; again the offer for general education students will be made at a later date.  

Advocates work with a large number of parents of children with disabilities.  We began receiving calls from parents who said they had received a call from a teacher making an offer, or reporting that their child is not eligible for compensatory services and that they received an email or letter titled Prior Written Notice.  Many of our clients received notice that their child will not receive any services, others received notice that their child is eligible for as little as 210 minutes or as much as 15 hours.  Fifteen hours was offered to a student who did not receive technology or a hot spot until October 2020 (no instruction or services was provided March, April, May and September through October 20^th).  Prior Written Notice informs the family that compensatory services will be provided sometime in the next two years and could be delivered during the regular school day.

The District will receive and has budgeted 9 million dollars for special education and an additional 22 million to pay for recovery services for Denver students.  

• The District has made it clear that they will not provide compensatory/recovery services during the summer 2021.  Accordingly, there is no immediate need or reason to define an offer of compensatory/recovery services to students with disabilities.  
• A written notice should be sent to each parent setting a new timeline and explaining the procedures for determining compensatory/recovery services.  The notice should include plain language definition of terms; the notice should be provided in the parent’s primary language. 
• An offer (refusal) of compensatory services must be the result of an Individualized Education Program meeting that includes the parent.   
• The IEP team should consider the following, the list is not exhaustive:
  • whether or not appropriate technology was made available to the student; 
  • whether the student was able to operate the technology independently and/or with limited assistance; 
  • whether remote learning had meaning to the student;  
  • whether the student made expected progress toward the goals and objectives that were defined in the IEP that was in place at the start of the pandemic as well as additional IEPs developed during the course of the pandemic (2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years);
  •  whether the student was provided the special education and related services defined in the IEP that was in place at the start of the pandemic as well as additional IEPs developed during the course of the pandemic (2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years).

Applying a one size fits all, blanket approach when identifying compensatory services does not align with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and/or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.  We look forward to working with the Board of Education and/or District to resolve the issues outlined in this letter.

Respectfully,

Pamela Bisceglia
Executive Director

Julie Rieskin
Executive Director

Meryl Duguay, Ed.S.
Owner | Advocate

Elisa Aucancela
Executive Director

Yvette Plummer Burkhalter
Executive Director

Copy:
Dr. Miranda B. Kogon, Associate Chief, Student Equity & Opportunity
Robert Frantum-Allen, Special Education Director

The post AdvocacyDenver to DPS: Current Compensatory Services Plan is Failing Students with Disabilities appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

AdvocacyDenver ha recibido muchas preguntas por parte de los padres/tutores de niños con discapacidades con respecto a qué esperar a partir de agosto de 2020. Sabemos que las Escuelas Públicas de Denver anunciaron que la educación a distancia se ha extendido del 24 de agosto al 16 de octubre.

AdvocacyDenver mantiene un registro de preguntas y ha estado trabajando con el director de educación especial, Robert Frantum-Allen, para definir las respuestas. A continuación, se refleja lo que el distrito piensa actualmente. Esto es un comienzo en términos de preguntas y respuestas específicas para los niños con discapacidades.

Este documento se modificará e incluirá preguntas y respuestas adicionales relativas a los planes de intervención del comportamiento, los servicios de adquisición del idioma inglés, los programas de los centros, las tecnologías de apoyo y los niños elegibles conforme a la sección 504 de la Ley de Rehabilitación.

Si tiene una pregunta que no esté comprendida en este documento, lo animamos a llamar (303-831-7733) o enviar un correo electrónico: Pbisceglia@advocacydenver.org. 

Evaluación

P: Tenemos un hijo pequeño que sospechamos que tiene una discapacidad, pero no tiene edad suficiente para inscribirlo en la escuela. ¿El distrito puede evaluar a mi hijo durante la pandemia de COVID-19?

R: El equipo de Early Childhood Child Find de las Escuelas Públicas de Denver (Denver Public Schools, “DPS”) y los Servicios Humanos de Rocky Mountain trabajan juntos para hacer exámenes sistemáticos del desarrollo y evaluar a los niños desde el nacimiento hasta los 2 años que corran riesgo o que tengan una discapacidad. Además, el equipo de Early Childhood Child Find de las DPS evalúa a los niños antes de que cumplan los 3 años para determinar si son elegibles o no como niños con una discapacidad conforme a la parte B de la Ley de Educación para Personas con Discapacidades (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, “IDEA”). Un equipo multidisciplinario conformado por maestros, psicólogos, trabajadores sociales, psicomotricistas y foniatras usarán técnicas de evaluación adecuadas al nivel de desarrollo, las que en su mayoría pueden hacerse a distancia. Si bien el equipo hace evaluaciones a distancia desde abril de 2020, reconoce que no todas las familias tienen acceso a la tecnología. Si conoce una familia con un niño pequeño que ha estado esperando una evaluación inicial pero aún no tiene internet ni tecnología, pídales que se pongan en contacto con Child Find de las DPS a fin de determinar los próximos pasos para llevar a cabo la evaluación. Por último, actualmente se ofrecen exámenes sistemáticos del desarrollo. Para obtener información relativa a un examen sistemático del desarrollo o a una evaluación pendiente, o a una evaluación inicial si su hijo no está inscrito en una escuela pública, llame al: 720-423-1410

P: Solicité que evaluarán a mi hijo (evaluación inicial) para determinar si es elegible como estudiante con una discapacidad conforme a la IDEA. La escuela comenzó la evaluación, pero luego entró en el receso prolongado. ¿Cuáles son los plazos para finalizar la evaluación?

R: La escuela tiene 60 días calendario para finalizar la evaluación y determinar si su hijo es elegible conforme a la IDEA. Si el equipo (del que usted es miembro) determina que su hijo cumple con los criterios de elegibilidad para una de las categorías de discapacidad, tiene 30 días más para elaborar un Programa de Educación Individualizada (Individualized Education Program, IEP) y hacer una oferta de educación pública adecuada y gratuita. Como consecuencia del COVID-19, las DPS admiten que, en el caso de algunos niños, la evaluación inicial y la elegibilidad no se han dado en los plazos dictados. El distrito ha aconsejado al equipo de la escuela que, cuando el personal de la escuela regrese en agosto de 2020, se ponga en contacto con la familia y hablen sobre las evaluaciones que se hicieron, y que los padres y el equipo de la escuela determinen si se requiere una evaluación o información adicionales a fin de determinar la elegibilidad. Si se ha recabado suficiente información, el equipo del IEP se reunirá y determinará la elegibilidad. Si el equipo determina que su hijo es elegible, programará una reunión para elaborar un IEP. El IEP se escribirá antes de que el niño vuelva a recibir educación en la escuela. Si su hijo continúa con el aprendizaje a distancia, el equipo también elaborará un plan de contingencia. El plan de contingencia identificará los servicios a distancia y las metas que se pueden abordar de forma remota. 

P: Presenté a la escuela una copia de una evaluación que hizo un proveedor privado. ¿La escuela puede usar esa información para determinar la elegibilidad conforme a la IDEA?

R: La escuela puede y debe considerar la evaluación privada al determinar la elegibilidad conforme a la IDEA. Se aconseja que los padres presenten una copia de la evaluación a la escuela. El equipo (incluidos los padres) determinará si es necesario hacer una evaluación adicional e identificará los próximos pasos para determinar la elegibilidad.

P: Mi hijo se cambió a una escuela nueva y el plazo para la reevaluación vence en otoño, ¿quién llevará a cabo la reevaluación?  

R: Si bien se está trabajando para introducir la teleevaluación (como la telemedicina), la mayoría de las evaluaciones formales no se pueden hacer a distancia. Las listas de verificación como BASC, Vineland, etc., se pueden completar en el hogar y enviarse, pero el personal que complete estas listas debe haber trabajado directamente con el estudiante durante los últimos 6 meses. Dicho esto, es posible que no sea necesario hacer una evaluación formal para redeterminar la elegibilidad. El equipo podría simplemente realizar una revisión de registros y determinar que el estudiante sigue siendo elegible conforme a la IDEA en función de esa revisión. El equipo sencillamente podría registrar los servicios, metas y adaptaciones del último IEP. Una vez que los estudiantes vuelvan a una escuela física, el equipo estará en situación de conocer las fortalezas y necesidades de su hijo y dilucidar si es necesaria alguna evaluación, y de actualizar las metas, objetivos, adaptaciones y servicios en el entorno menos restrictivo.

A Distancia, en la Escuela o Modelo Híbrido

P: A mi hijo no le fue bien con el aprendizaje a distancia, el tiempo frente a la pantalla no fue provechoso, ¿el distrito tiene algo distinto para ofrecer este año?

R: Se ha aconsejado a los equipos de la escuela que consideren lo siguiente al desarrollar el plan de contingencia:

• ¿El estudiante puede manejar la tecnología de modo independiente o con ayuda limitada? 
• ¿El contenido está disponible y se entiende? 
• ¿El contenido digital se puede usar por medio de varios apoyos tecnológicos (por ej., transferencia integrada de voz a texto, de texto a voz, etc.)? 
• ¿Se apoyan las solicitudes para las habilidades de las funciones motoras? 

Los educadores reconocen que es importante integrar apoyos para abordar las necesidades de aprendizaje, atención, comportamiento, sensoriales y físicas del estudiante y suministrar materiales adecuados. Por consiguiente, es posible que a algunos estudiantes les ofrezcan videos cortos y tareas para practicar solos; otros podrán tener poco tiempo frente a la pantalla y actividades prácticas con materiales u objetos didácticos. El distrito programará y registrará capacitaciones para los padres y educadores sobre una lista de temas tales como: cómo fomentar la práctica de las actividades menos preferidas; abordar el comportamiento, etc.

La decisión del distrito de que el aprendizaje sea a distancia se basa en las directrices de salud del Departamento de Salud Pública de Denver. A fin de mantener la seguridad de los estudiantes y los adultos, el distrito acatará estas recomendaciones. Su equipo del IEP puede trabajar con usted para intentar solucionar los problemas de estos tipos de situaciones mientras mantiene los protocolos de salud y seguridad. 

P: Mi hijo recibe apoyo paraprofesional personalizado en el entorno escolar; ¿el personal puede venir a mi hogar y brindar apoyo personalizado para el aprendizaje a distancia? 

R: En función de las recomendaciones del Departamento de Salud de Denver, a fin de minimizar la propagación del COVID-19, el distrito actualmente no permite que ningún miembro del personal trabaje directamente con un estudiante, ya sea en la escuela o en el entorno del hogar. Cuando al distrito se le permita reanudar la opción presencial o 100 % a distancia, el equipo del IEP, incluidos los padres o tutores, determinarán lo que es necesario para el estudiante. Esto puede incluir un modelo híbrido o acceso a algunos servicios presenciales, incluido el apoyo paraprofesional personalizado. Si el padre o la madre toman la decisión de que quieren que su hijo siga participando en el aprendizaje a distancia el primer semestre del año escolar de 2020 y el Departamento de Salud de Denver permite interacciones en persona, el equipo del IEP analizará caso por caso si se ofrecerá apoyo paraprofesional al estudiante en el hogar. Esta oferta se registrará en el plan de contingencia e incluirá la cantidad de horas que el personal trabajará con su hijo cada semana. El paraprofesional no será responsable de enseñar, pero puede facilitar la participación del niño en la educación en línea y la realización de las tareas del salón de clases. Un adulto mayor de 21 años debe estar en el hogar todo el tiempo. La familia debe proporcionar un espacio exclusivo para que el adulto trabaje con el niño. Es importante tener presente que es posible que el adulto que vaya a su hogar no sea el mismo que trabajó con su hijo en la escuela. Por último, si se emite la orden de quedarse en el hogar, la ayuda en el hogar se suspenderá y se ofrecerá educación virtual a todos los estudiantes.  

P: Mi hijo tiene necesidades considerables y el tiempo frente a la pantalla con un adulto no fue provechoso ni adecuado para él. ¿El distrito podrá ofrecerle a mi hijo algo distinto en agosto o en septiembre?

R: El distrito ha priorizado el reintegro a la escuela de distintas poblaciones de estudiantes. Los estudiantes con discapacidades moderadas a profundas conforman uno de los primeros grupos que el distrito está considerando traer nuevamente a la escuela de modo seguro.

Algunas consideraciones que el distrito está teniendo en cuenta para determinar el reintegro al aprendizaje presencial de los estudiantes con necesidades considerables son:

• Los estudiantes podrían concurrir a la escuela 4 días a la semana o medio día.
• Los estudiantes elegibles seguirán recibiendo transporte.
• Los niños se quedarán con el mismo grupo de alumnos y no se trasladarán a otros salones de clases para hacer actividades de inclusión ni asignaturas optativas.
• Es posible que algunos servicios relacionados se brinden a distancia o por transmisión en vivo en el salón de clases.
• Si un miembro del grupo (estudiante o adulto) da positivo en la prueba de COVID-19, los estudiantes y el personal harán cuarentena en su hogar por 14 días. El distrito, en colaboración con los socios médicos, determinará en qué momento será seguro que el grupo vuelva a la escuela.
• Si el Departamento de Salud de Denver emite la orden de quedarse en el hogar o se emite una orden a nivel estatal de quedarse en el hogar, todos los estudiantes retomarán el aprendizaje a distancia.  

P: Mi hijo pasa la mayor parte del día en el salón de clases de educación general y se traslada para trabajar con el maestro de educación especial u otros proveedores de servicios relacionados, o bien ellos van al salón de clases para trabajar con mi hijo. Si el distrito ofrece educación en la escuela, ¿la escuela ofrecerá los servicios en el entorno identificado en el IEP de mi hijo?

R: Cuando la escuela comience de nuevo, se asignará a su hijo a un salón de clases de educación general; el maestro y los estudiantes de ese salón de clases pasarán a ser un grupo. Esta asignación permitirá que su hijo se quede con el mismo grupo de alumnos y adultos. Es importante tener en cuenta que los horarios y los días o semanas escolares de su hijo serán distintos:

• Los estudiantes podrían concurrir a la escuela 4 días a la semana o medio día.
• Los estudiantes elegibles seguirán recibiendo transporte.
• Los niños se quedarán con el mismo grupo de alumnos y no se trasladarán a otros salones de clases para recibir educación especial ni servicios relacionados. En su lugar, el proveedor transmitirá en vivo los servicios, otrabajará con su hijo y, si corresponde, con otros estudiantes del mismo grupo en el salón de clases de educación general, o en un área segura justo al lado del salón de clases.
• Algunos servicios relacionados se pueden brindar a distancia.
• Si un miembro del grupo (estudiante o adulto) da positivo en la prueba de COVID-19, los estudiantes y el personal harán cuarentena en su hogar por 14 días. El distrito, en colaboración con los socios médicos, determinará en qué momento será seguro que el grupo vuelva a la escuela.
• Si se emite la orden de quedarse el hogar, todos los estudiantes retomarán el aprendizaje a distancia. 

P: Mi hijo seguirá participando en el aprendizaje a distancia. El año pasado, la escuela elaboró un plan de contingencia y definió un cronograma para la educación especial y los servicios relacionados. Los servicios no se planificaron para permitir que mi hijo participara en la educación general. En consecuencia, mi hijo perdió instrucción, pero igualmente se esperaba que realizara el trabajo independiente. Además, las tareas de educación general no se adaptaron ni modificaron como correspondía. ¿La escuela coordinará un programa más adecuado para mi hijo? ¿Quién es responsable de proporcionar adaptaciones y modificaciones?

R: Se suministrará una planificación específica al personal de la escuela y a los profesionales que facilitan el aprendizaje a distancia todos los días. Se hará tiempo para colaborar/coordinar los programas de los estudiantes. Se proveerá una copia del plan de contingencia de su hijo y una lista de adaptaciones al maestro de educación general. Se espera que el maestro de educación general proporcione las adaptaciones; el maestro de educación especial (y cuando corresponda) los proveedores de servicios relacionados son responsables de modificar los materiales/tareas. Asegúrese de tratar estas preocupaciones con el director de la escuela. Los padres también pueden esperar que el maestro:

• Proporcione un calendario de actividades a la familia.
• Proporcione un cronograma plastificado que permita que los padres y los estudiantes marquen las actividades diarias.
• Ponga en copia a los padres en todos los correos electrónicos que se envíen al estudiante.
• Suministre una copia de las contraseñas a los padres.
• Esté disponible para resolver problemas.

Servicios Compensatorios

P: Mi hijo está en la escuela secundaria, ¿le permitirán concurrir a la escuela un año adicional para obtener los créditos necesarios y para recibir servicios compensatorios?
P: ¿Cómo y cuándo calculará la escuela los servicios compensatorios?

R: El equipo del IEP determinará los servicios compensatorios que se proveerán para compensar los servicios perdidos durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Si su hijo está en la escuela secundaria, es importante tener en cuenta la cantidad de créditos que ha obtenido y sus estudios. En el caso de los estudiantes desde educación de la primera infancia (ECE) hasta la escuela secundaria, el equipo del IEP se reunirá para hablar sobre los servicios compensatorios (educación especial y servicios relacionados). El equipo no calculará simplemente la cantidad exacta de minutos de servicios identificados en el IEP; en lugar de eso, el equipo identificará los servicios que pondrán a su hijo en la misma posición en la que estaría si se hubiera impartido educación pública adecuada y gratuita (free, appropriate public education,FAPE) durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Debido a que los servicios compensatorios son individualizados, es posible que se necesiten más o menos minutos para que el estudiante recupere habilidades académicas, socioemocionales o lingüísticas.  

The post Preguntas Frecuentes de los Padres de Niños con Discapacidades con respecto a la Educación y el COVID-19 appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

AdvocacyDenver has received many questions from parents/guardians of children with disabilities regarding what to expect beginning in August 2020. We know that Denver Public Schools announced that remote instruction has been extended from August 24 through October 16.

AdvocacyDenver has kept a record of questions and has been working with the Special Education Director Robert Frantum-Allen to define a response to questions.

The following reflects the current thinking on the part of the District. This is a start in terms of questions and answers specific to children with disabilities.

This document will be amended and will include additional questions and answers in relation to Behavior Intervention Plans, English Language Acquisition services, facility programs, assistive technology and children eligible under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. If you have a question that is not included in this document, you are encouraged to call (303-831-7733) or email: pbisceglia@advocacydenver.org.

Evaluation

Q: We have a young child that that we suspect has a disability but is not old enough to be enrolled in school. Can the District evaluate my child during Covid-19?

A: Denver Public Schools (“DPS”) Early Childhood Child Find team and Rocky Mountain Human Services work together to provide developmental screenings and evaluate children birth through age 2 who are at risk for or with a disability. Furthermore, DPS Early Childhood Child Find team evaluates children before they turn 3 to determine whether or not they are the eligible as a child with a disability under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). A multi-disciplinary team made up of teachers, psychologist, social workers, motor therapists, and speech language therapist will use developmentally appropriate evaluation techniques, most of which is can done remotely. Although the team has been conducting assessments remotely since April 2020 the Team recognizes not all families have access to technology. If you know of a family with a young child who has been waiting for an initial evaluation but do not have internet or technology, please have them contact DPS Child Find to identify next steps to complete the evaluation. Finally, developmental screenings are currently available. For information in relation to a developmental screening or a pending evaluation, or an initial evaluation of your child is not enrolled in a public school please call: 720-423-1410

Q: I requested that my child be evaluated (initial evaluation) to determine if he/she is eligible as a student with a disability under the IDEA. The school started the evaluation but then went on extended break. What is the timeline for completing the evaluation?

A: The school has 60 calendar days to complete the evaluation and determine if your child is eligible under IDEA. If the team (of which you are a member) determines your child meets the eligibility criteria for one of the disability categories, the team has 30 more days to develop an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and make an offer of a free, appropriate public education. As a result of Covid-19, DPS admits that for some children, the initial evaluation and eligibility has not happened within the given timeline. When school staff return August 2020, the District has advised the school team to reach out to the family and discuss the evaluations that have been completed and for the parent and the school team to determine additional evaluation or information is needed in order to determine eligibility. If enough information has been gathered, the IEP team will convene and determine eligibility. If the team determines that your child is eligible, the Team will schedule a meeting to develop an IEP. The IEP will be written in anticipation of the child returning for in-school instruction. If your child continues remote learning, the Team will also develop a Contingency Plan. The Contingency Plan will identify distance services and goals that can be addressed remotely.

Q: I provided the school with a copy of an evaluation that was completed by a private provider. Can the school use that information to determine eligibility under IDEA?

A: The school can and should consider the private evaluation when determining eligibility under IDEA. The parent is advised to provide the school with a copy of the evaluation. The Team (which includes the parent) will determine if additional evaluation is needed and identify next steps to determine eligibility.

Q: My child has transitioned to a new school and the reevaluation is due in the fall, who will complete the reevaluation?

A: Although work is being done to introduce tele-evaluation (like telehealth) most formal evaluations cannot be performed remotely. Checklists like the BASC, Vineland, etc. can be completed at home and submitted, but the staff completing checklists must have worked with the student directly for the last 6 months. Having said that, formal evaluation may not be needed to re-determine eligibility. The team could simply complete a review of records and determine that the student continues to be eligible under the IDEA based on that review.

The team might simply record the services, goals and accommodations from the last IEP. Once students return to a brick and mortar school the team will be in a position to get to know your student’s strengths and needs and tease out what, if any evaluations might be needed and to update goals, objectives, accommodations and services in the least restrictive environment.

Remote, In-School, or Hybrid?

Q: My child did not do well with remote learning, screen time was not meaningful, does the district have something different to offer this year?
A: School teams have been advised to consider the following when developing the Contingency

Plan:

• Can the student operate the technology independently and/or with limited assistance?
• Is the content available and understandable?
• Can the digital content be utilized via various technology supports (e.g., built-in speech totext, text to speech, etc.)?
• Are the demands of executive function skills supported?

The district decision to do remote learning is based on health guidance from the Denver Department of Public Health. In order to maintain safety for both students and adults, The District will to abide by these recommendations. Your IEP team can work with you to attempt to problem solve these types of situations while maintaining the health and safety protocols.

Q: My child has one-on-one paraprofessional support in the school setting; can that staff come to my home and provide one-on-one support for remote learning?

A: Based upon recommendations from the Denver Health Department, in order to minimize the spread of COVID-19, currently the District does not allow any staff to work directly with a student in either the school or home setting. When the district is allowed to resume in-person or 100% remote option, then the IEP team, that includes the parent/guardian, will determine what is needed for the student. This might include a hybrid model or access to some in- person services including 1:1 paraprofessional support. If the parent makes a decision that they want their child to continue to participate in remote learning first semester of the 2020 school year and the Denver Department of Health will allow in-person interactions, the IEP team will consider on a case-by-case basis whether paraprofessional support will be provided to the student in the home. This offer will be recorded in the Contingency Plan and will include the number of hours this staff will work with your child each week. The paraprofessional will not be responsible for providing instruction, but can facilitate the child’s participation in on-line instruction and completion of classroom work. An adult over the age of 21 must be in the home the entire time. The family must provide a dedicated space for the adult to work with their child. It is important to note that the adult coming to your home might not be the same adult who worked with your child at school. Finally, if stay at home orders are issued, in home support will stop and all students will be offered virtual instruction.

Q: My child has significant needs and screen time with an adult was not meaningful and/or appropriate for my child. Will the District be able to offer my child something different in August, or September?

A: The District has prioritized bringing different populations of students back to school. Students with moderate to profound disabilities is one of the first groups that the District is considering to safely bring back to school.

Some of the considerations the district is using to determine the return to in-person learning for students with significant needs may include:

• Students might attend school 4 days a week or half days
• Eligible students will continue to receive transportation;
• Children will stay with the same cohort of learners and will not travel to otherclassrooms for inclusion or electives
• Some related services might be delivered remotely or through live-streaming into theclassroom;
• If a member of the cohort (student or adult) tests positive for COVID-19, students andstaff will quarantine at home for 14 days. The District in consultation with medicalpartners will determine when it is safe for the cohort to return to school.
• If stay at home orders are issued by the Denver Department of Health or a state widestay at home order is issued, all students will return to remote learning.

Q: My child spends the most of their day in the general education classroom and either travels to work with the special education teacher or other related service providers or they come into the classroom to work with my child. If the District offers in-school instruction will the school provide the services in the setting identified in my child’s IEP?

A: When school resumes, your child will be assigned to a general education classroom; the teacher and students in that classroom become a cohort. This assignment would allow your child to stay with the same cohort of learners and adults. It is important to note that your child’s schedule, school day or week will be different:

• Students might attend school 4 days a week or half days
• Eligible students will continue to receive transportation;
• Children will stay with the same cohort of learners and will not travel to another classroom for special education or related services. Instead the provider will livestream services, or work with your child and if appropriate other students in the same cohort in the general education classroom or in a safe area just outside of the classroom

Some related services may be delivered remotely:

• If a member of the cohort (student or adult) tests positive for COVID-19, students and staff will quarantine at home for 14 days. The District in consultation with medical partners will determine when it is safe for the cohort to return to school.
• If stay at home orders are issued all students will return to remote learning.

Q: My child will continue to participate in remote learning. Last year the school developed a Contingency Plan and defined a schedule for special education and related services. Services were not scheduled to allow my child to participate in general education instruction. As a result, my child missed instruction, but was still expected to complete independent work. Furthermore, the general education assignments were not accommodated or modified as appropriate. Will the school coordinate a more appropriate schedule for my child? Who is responsible for providing accommodations and modifications?

A: School staff and professionals facilitating remote learning will be provided dedicated planning each day. Time will be carved out to collaborate/coordinate student’s schedules. The general education teacher will be provided a copy of your child’s Contingency Plan and a list of adaptations. The general education teacher is expected to provide the accommodations; the special education teacher (and when appropriate) related service providers are responsible for modifying materials/assignments. Make sure you address these concerns with your school principal. Parents can also expect that the teacher:

• Will provide the family with a calendar of activities;
• A laminated schedule that allows the parent and student to check off daily activities
• Will copy the parent on any emails sent to the student
• Will provide the parent with a copy of passwords
• Will be available to problem solve.

Compensatory Services

Q: My child is in high school, will my child be allowed to attend school an additional year to earn credits needed and to receive Compensatory Services?
Q: How and when will the school calculate compensatory services?

A: The IEP team will determine compensatory services that will be provided to make up for services missed during COVID 19. If your child is in high school, it is important to consider the number of credits your child has earned and their course of study. For student’s ECE through high school, the IEP team will meet to discuss compensatory services (special education and related services). The Team will not simply calculate the exact amount of services minutes identified on the IEP, instead the team will identify services that will place your child in the same position they would have been in if a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) had been provided during COVID-19. Because compensatory services are individualized, more minutes or fewer minutes may be needed to for the student to recoup academic, social emotional and or language skills.

The post Denver Public School’s Education and COVID-19 FAQs for Parents and Children with Disabilities appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

From The Desk of Pamela Bisceglia

On February 6, 2020, a complaint of discrimination was filed by a member of Denver Public School (“DPS”) staff against the Principal of Inspire Elementary School. The complaint was filed in accordance with DPS Board of Education policy AC. The complainant alleged that the Principal discriminated against the student based on race (Black) and disability. AdvocacyDenver appreciates the staff that stood firm advocating for the appropriate treatment of the student and forwarded the complaint of discrimination.

The District conducted an internal investigation.  The investigation included a review of documentary evidence and interview of individual witnesses including the principal, the student, and his guardian.

June 16, 2020, the Investigator issued the findings; specifically, the Investigator found that the Principal used her authority to discriminate against the student based on his race, in violation of Board Policy AC and AC-R1, as evidenced by the following non-exhaustive list of incidents.

• The Principal used her authority to try to prevent the student from attending Inspire. The guardian provided the school with evidence of address.  Steps were taken by the Principal and her staff in contacting the Manager of the Apartment Complex in “Stapleton”, and informed them that the family was using that address as their place of residency, which caused the family to receive a ten-day eviction notice.
• The Principal documented the student’s behaviors in the District’s student reporting system, Infinite Campus, in a manner that appeared to build a case for removing him from the school under the appearance of safety concerns for staff and students. However, a white student with the same or similar behaviors was not documented in this same fashion.
• The Principal used improper student discipline and thereby failed to use the District’s discipline matrix outlined in Board Policy JK and JK-R.
• The Principal failed to follow hold/restraint protocols and implement Non-Crisis Intervention (NCI) guidelines which provide the circumstances under which holds and restraints may be used. The Principal failed to report the physical holds that were administered to the student’s guardian and failed to properly document the restraints as required by Board Policy JKA and JKA-R.
• The Principal repeatedly called DPS Safety and Security about the student. She also called the Denver Police Department (DPD), even though the student was only eight years old, and she allowed a DPD officer to interrogate this and other elementary students, without notifying parents in violation of Board Policy JIH. This led to the DPD Officer confronting the guardian and student and threatening the guardian about the possibility of her child being arrested and charged in the future. 
• The Principal demanded that school-based and District-based staff proceed with the testing process for an Individualized Education Program on an accelerated timeline so that the student could be placed in an intensive needs program outside of Inspire Elementary School.
• The Principal reported the guardian to the Denver Human Services on three separate occasions based on her assumptions that the student was not being picked up at the bus stop after school, being left alone until 9:00 p.m. and her own medical diagnoses of the student needing to be on medication and receive outside therapy.
• The Principal constantly called the guardian regarding the student’s behavior, asking that she come to the school in the middle of the day, knowing that if she came to the school the guardian would take him home because of the guardian’s concern for his safety and wellbeing. The guardian’s concern for his safety was amplified when she learned that he was being put in hold/restraints by the Principal and other staff at Inspire which caused her to keep him home and later request that be transferred to another school.

AdvocacyDenver understands that corrective measures were taken.  The Principal can appeal if she disagrees with the District’s findings.  Having said that, AdvocacyDenver expects that District leaders and the Board of Education will stand firm and will not entertain bringing this principal back to DPS in any capacity.  It is the guardian’s wish that the Principal, not be employed by any school district; the social, emotional, and educational harm caused by this staff is immense.  The student has always enjoyed school and although he expects he will no longer attend Inspire, he does not demonstrate the same thirst/love for learning.  It will take time for the District to restore their working relationship with the family.  It will take time for the family to trust that school is a safe, welcoming place.

The post Finding That Inspire Elementary School Principal Discriminated Against a Student Based on Race appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

From The Desk of Pamela Bisceglia

Dear Denver Public Schools Board of Education:

We are writing as advocates in the disability community to ask that you support the call of your colleagues, Tay Anderson and Jennifer Bacon, to end the human rights violations of school policing. In this historic moment spurred by the murder of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, we call on you to do what is right and just and vote to terminate the Denver Public Schools’ (DPS) contract with the Denver Police Department and remove all police from the DPS.

The school to prison pipeline has been an issue that has been at the forefront of our work. This is an issue where AdvocacyDenver appreciates having an opportunity to collaborate with Padres, other community groups and Denver Public Schools to forward change. This is an issue that impacts black and brown male students and a growing number of female students, but it also significantly impacts students with disabilities. Students with disabilities are among the most acutely impacted by school policing, at risk of being criminalized at school. Between 40-60 percent of youth and adults in correction facilities have an identified disability. October 2019, we submitted a request to CDE and received a copy of what DPS submitted regarding referrals to law enforcement beginning in 2015. For 2018-2019 the available data confirms that that although 11 percent of the students enrolled in DPS are identified as having a disability, they make up 25% of the referrals to law enforcement.

Based on the advocacy referrals received by AdvocacyDenver and other community agencies, we suspect that the number of calls to law enforcement went up this year. That is, Denver Public Schools Safety and Security ended the practice of handcuffing children and instead elementary, middle and high schools were directed to call the police department. Parents report that they are called after the police and asked to come to the school campus. Fall 2019, the parent of a 5-year-old child with a disability was summoned to the elementary school, she was terrified to see two police officers with her 5-year-old black son.

We support a Board of Education Resolution that calls for the end of the contract with Denver Police Department. We support a Resolution that calls for a review of the role and responsibility of DPS Safety and Security officers. We support a Resolution that calls for an independent review when Safety and Security or the police are called to a campus. We support a decision to provide highly trained staff versed in working with a diverse urban population, positive behavior interventions and restorative practices.

It is time for DPS to invest in practices that improve outcomes for all students, including but not limited to restorative justice programs; increased use of school psychologists, social workers, and other mental health professionals; drug and alcohol treatment services; wraparound services for youth; and training for all school staff on restorative practices, conflict resolution techniques and trauma-informed approaches to meeting students’ developmental needs.

Respectfully,

Pamela Bisceglia
Executive Director

The post Community Endorses a Board Resolution to Remove School Resource Officers and Review of Role and Responsibility and Actions of Denver Public Schools Safety and Security appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

House Bill 20-1128, Sponsored by Representatives Bri Buentello
(HD-47) and James Wilson (HD-60) in the House and Senators Rachel Zenzinger (SD-19) and Kevin Priola (SD-25) in the Senate, aims to add the requirement of at least 10 hours of professional development regarding the laws and practices of educating students with disabilities to educator licensing for teachers, special services providers, principals, and administrators.

The bill recently passed out of the House of Representatives and was introduced in the Senate and assigned to the Education committee. In an interview with Sarah Havlicek, Representative Buentello, a special education teacher herself, explains the necessity of the bill and ways it will improve special education practices for diverse learners in the state of Colorado.

Why is this bill needed?

Colorado is miserably behind on current practices in special education. Frankly, it stems from our disconnect with the law. Right now in the state of Colorado, there are several ways you can get a teaching license without ever having any kind of special education training. It became painfully obvious when I became a teacher in Colorado that there is a fairly significant gap between teacher training and best special education practices for diverse learners. I have co-workers who are not recent college graduates, which means they weren’t subject to the mandate that we now teach education candidates special education best practices. These people already have their Master’s in different topics, they didn’t have any training in their undergraduate work in relation to special education and if it’s not mandated, we just don’t do it. We see the result of not having that mandate. So, I am really proud to introduce this bill to bring a fairly comprehensive overhaul.

Why did you decide to sponsor this bill?

I came to Colorado five years ago and it did surprise me, the disconnect, between best and most current practices in teaching and fostering an inclusive learning environment and teaching to those diverse abilities. I have talked a lot about my son as a student with a disability and his experience but the events that really stand out to me in my mind were actually when I was teaching. There was a math teacher who had absolutely no background in special education and my students, who were special education identified and had an Individualized Education Program (IEP), their IEPs were totally ignored by the math teacher. She had absolutely no regard for them and as a result, my students, their learning, and their graduation rates suffered. So That is when I first realized that the law was behind here in Colorado. Because there was no mandate, lots of people were not complying with federal law and I really want to close this gap for our exceptional learning learners.

What ways will the education requirements for educators change if this bill is passed?

It is actually pretty comprehensive. First of all, colleges will now be mandated to provide all education candidates a background in special education. I left that up to the boards and the curriculum department within universities’ education programs, they just have to demonstrate they are instructing teaching candidates. That is already the practice, it just is not reflected in Colorado law. So, I caught that up. A second requirement is, from now on, if you are licensed, whether as an administrator or a teacher in Colorado, you have to demonstrate that ten hours of your background training must have something to do with topics within exceptional student learning. I believe there will be a lot of overlap between the Colorado READ Act, just because the READ Act also requires teachers to learn about reading disabilities and how to teach to those capabilities. I strongly feel that we needed at least a thousand-foot comprehensive overview of what students with disabilities really looks like, because, it is as broad and diverse as our students.

In what ways will students be impacted by the new requirements for educators?

It will take a little while, it will be seven years, because there is a two-year ramp up in this program. Seven years from now, every licensed teacher and administrator in the state of Colorado will have training in special education and that is something I just couldn’t be prouder of.

Sarah Havlicek holds a B.A. in Communication and Journalism from the University of Saint Thomas and a M.A. in Communication Studies with an emphasis in Interpersonal and Organizational Communication from Saint Louis University. Sarah works on AdvocacyDenver’s Policy Perspective, interviewing key stakeholders and legislators about policy that are related to the work and mission of AdvocacyDenver.

For questions or comments, contact Sarah at shavlicek@advocacydenver.org

The post House Bill Aims to Add Special Education Requirements to Educator License appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.

From the Desk of Pamela Bisceglia, Executive Director

AdvocacyDenver is pleased to forward the following interview with Denver Public Schools Superintendent Susana Cordova. There are two reasons why this interview is important. At different times during Tom Boasberg’s tenure, we attempted to secure a time to meet with him to discuss systemic issues in relation to programming for students with disabilities. The former superintendent ignored all requests from AdvocacyDenver to meet and ordered deep cuts to Special Education every few years. The cuts resulted in a significant decrease in Special Education oversight, professional development, and elimination of the autism, behavior and assistive technology service teams. Each year, Special Education teachers and in particular related services providers’ caseloads were increased.

An Interview with Catherine Strode

What motivated you to get into the field of education?

I was a Latina, first generation college graduate. In 1984, there was not a lot of work going on around cultural competence. The message I heard was, ‘Get educated so you can get out of your neighborhood.’ I lacked a positive sense of identity. In college I found a literary journal that had published work by Chicano authors. It was a transformational moment for me. I realized these are people with PhDs who were writing about an experience that was very familiar to me in an academic setting They had not stopped being who they were to get educated. They had invested in their identity and in their culture, by creating literature to describe and share it with others. It was the first time I realized becoming educated can be a way to help you more fully realize your identity. That is what encouraged me to become a teacher. I wanted to make sure other kids, like me, were affirmed for who they were. That their gifts, their values, their culture, their language, were seen as an asset.

What motivated you to apply for the Superintendent position?

I am deeply committed to the success of our schools in Denver. I have had a lot of different roles in DPS. I have worked in the classroom, both at Middle School and High School. I was an elementary school principal. I have had many roles in the central office. I appreciate the roles our schools and teachers play in creating greater opportunity for students. When Tom (Boasberg) stepped down, I had been thinking about wanting to apply. I had always planned on waiting until my youngest was out of high school. She’s a senior this year, so it was a little quicker than I had anticipated. But I feel so committed to our city and to our kids that when he stepped down, I decided to put my name in. I believe I have a lot to contribute. I feel I can help us move quickly to the next level.

There are laws that define the district’s obligation to educate student with disabilities. Under your leadership, what decisions will be delegated to the school?

It would be very challenging for the district level to have knowledge of individual kids in the way we want our special educators and general educators to have knowledge of kids on a daily basis. We need to make sure we have general educators and special educators who can develop students’ Individualized Education Program (IEP) based on demonstrated needs. Schools should be working on the design of the wrap around services that are aligned to student needs within their building. It’s critical that schools are making the right kind of choices on how we ensure kids with disabilities have access to all appropriate parts of their school buildings. That we’re making investments in our center program classrooms in the same way we make them in our general education classrooms. That the school is building out their staffing plans aligned to the needs of their kids with disabilities and what their IEP’s call for. That’s part of the important work that happens at the school level.

What authority will central administration have to ensure compliance?

At the district level, we have a role in developing tools and resources for parent education so schools aren’t having to individually create those on their own. We need to be able to provide special educators with in depth training. We need to make investments in the services for our students with disabilities, financial investments as well as staffing and instructional resource investments. For our center programs, it is critical we have access to the materials, environments, and support systems conducive to kids being able to progress. We’re a big system. There’s no way to ensure that every decision that gets made is going to always, 100 per cent, align with what the expectations are. If it doesn’t, we need to be able to know it quickly so we can intervene and support. The real emphasis at the district level is: how do we make sure we turn our guidance into real systems with clarity of expectation, written guidance, training, supports to implement, and oversight? We also have a role in oversight through the review and monitoring of actual IEP’s, so we can make sure we are meeting students’ needs and being in compliance with the law. We need particularly, to make sure students have access to the least restrictive environment. It has been helpful to have the Special Education Task Force working because it has pointed out the places where there’s a goal in the system that isn’t being actualized.

What did you learn in the past 40 days?

One of the lessons I took away has been the importance of being at the table and sticking with hard conversations to get to solutions that feel positive for everybody. It’s critical you stay at the table. The other lesson was being clear in articulating the most important aspects of a negotiated agreement we needed to feel good about agreeing. Our teachers were clear they were committed to having more money in base salaries. The district was clear it was important we maintain support for Title I schools, and the 30 highest priority schools (that have a very high number of students with disabilities). One of my lessons was that with collaboration, people can solve really hard problems. That’s how I’m going to approach the rest of the work I’ll have as Superintendent, looking for ways to create space for collaboration and for smart people to come together to disagree. Disagreements are important because they help clarify what the values are at play. That was my other big lesson.”

What will you focus on the next 120 days?

The next set of work we have is to help create greater alignment and impact in the support we provide to schools and in the outcomes we see for kids. A big part of that is sharing my vision and getting feedback on that vision. It is a way for me to start working with our community, both our external and internal community, on key questions that are going to be critical for us as we think about the pathway forward. Another big body of work we will be engaged in, is reorganization of the central office. In part, to help fund the increases we’re providing to our teachers and to have a more impactful central office with less inefficiency and redundancy in the supports we offer. This is a great opportunity for us to think about: how we are organized centrally, how we’re investing in areas that need more investment, and how we’re slimming down in areas where we’re not getting the impact we want. That will be part of the work over the next several months.

Catherine Strode is Advocacy Denver’s Communications and Policy Specialist.  She holds a Masters degree in Public Administration with an emphasis in Health Care Policy. Catherine publishes Policy Perspective, featuring interviews with state policy makers on issues that affect the work and mission of Advocacy Denver.

The post Looking Forward With Denver Public Schools Superintendent Susana Cordova appeared first on AdvocacyDenver.