Application of Court Cases and Reading Materials

Application of Court Cases and Reading Materials
Student’s Name
Institution
Application of Court Cases and Reading Materials
Question One: Latoya’s Case
Under the Individual Disability Education Act (IDEA), Latoya’s parents have a right to fight for inclusive and appropriate education for their child. One of the main purposes of IDEA is to ensure that every child with a disability has “available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living (Wrightslaw, 2018).” Under IDEA, Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) is defined as special education and related services that are provided free of charge and are in compliance with an individualized education program (IEP). IEP is a written document that is developed by a team to ensure that the unique educational needs of a child with disabilities are met (Wrightslaw, 2018). IEP states the child’s “present levels of academic achievement and functional performance as well as “measurable annual goals”, among other things. In the case of Latoya, the school did not provide the parents with information about Latoya’s performance in the general education classroom, which means that this information was missing in the IEP. Also, the IEP should provide a statement of why a child will not be included in the regular classroom (Wrightslaw, 2018). Yet, Latoya’s parents did not receive such an explanation. Thus, the IEP was not sufficient since it lacked such crucial information. Also, the goals provided by the IEP were below Latoya’s needs since she had achieved them while in third grade, according to her parents. The goals stated in the IEP should not only be measurable but should also meet the educational needs of the child and enable them to “make progress in the general education curriculum (Wrightslaw, 2018).” How could Latoya’s educational needs be met if she had already mastered the goals in her new IEP? Latoya’s parent can use the court's statement in Endrew v. Douglas County School District, which was that “to meet its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a school must offer an IEP that is reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances (Endrew, 2016).”
Also, under IDEA, a child with a disability should be provided with their educational needs within the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). This means that to the “maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are non-disabled; and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily (Wrightslaw, 2018).” Latoya’s parents can use this element of IDEA to argue for Latoya’s inclusion in the general education classroom for science and social studies. While in third grade, Latoya was in the general classroom for reading and would only be pulled out if there were too many distractions. However, the public school pulled her from the general education classroom after completing their special education evaluation and placed her in a life skills classroom. Further, the school did not explore the alternatives for enabling Latoya to participate in the general education classroom. Could Latoya participate in the general classroom if she had alternative instructional methods, such as the ones she was provided with by the aide in the private school? The school failed to explore such alternatives. Latoya’s parents can also use the decision of the court in Oberti v. Clementon. The court ruled that the school district had not made significant efforts to mainstream Rafael Oberti to the maximum extent appropriate, as required by LRE. The courts stated that the school district did not make “reasonable efforts to include Rafael in a regular classroom with supplementary aids and services… (Oberti, n.d.).” Similarly, Latoya’s public school did not make any efforts to mainstream Latoya by providing supplementary services, other than including her in a general classroom with a “one-to-one aide” before the placement evaluation was completed. Further, under LRE, the decision on the placement of a child should be done “by a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options (Wrightslaw, 2018).” However, the school did not share the information about Latoya’s performance in the general classroom with her parents, nor did it explain why Latoya was placed in the life skills classroom. In this case, the parents lacked all the necessary information to fully participate in the placement decision.
Finally, Latoya’s parents can request for an independent educational evaluation. The psychologist assigned to Latoya’s case did not complete Latoya’s evaluation. Also, the parents were given limited time to go through the evaluation documents and as such, they did not fully synthesis the evaluation data. Under IDEA, parents have a right to request an independent evaluation free of charge (Wrightslaw, 2018). Latoya’s parents can also file a due process complaint concerning the evaluation and placement of Latoya in the life skills classroom. This is a right provided under IDEA. IDEA requires schools to conduct sufficient and appropriate evaluations to facilitate appropriate educational placement of students with disabilities. An incomplete evaluation cannot be termed as sufficient because some important aspects of Latoya’s needs could have been missed.
Question Two: Kliewer’s Metaphor
Kliewer (1998), in his book Schooling Children with Down syndrome, uses several metaphors when assessing how people perceive children with Down Syndrome. These metaphors describe the representation of students with Down syndrome and how these students are assigned different values in comparison to other non-disabled students. The first metaphor is “alien”. This metaphor is used to describe how children with Down syndrome are treated differently because they have unique educational needs. According to Kliewer (1998), these educational needs are considered “foreign and burdensome to the teaching methods of regular education…” As a result, these students are separated from other non-disabled students, hence the term alien. By using the term alien, Kliewer implies that students with Down syndrome are not treated as part of the general school community but rather, as outsiders who can only make the life of others more complex. The full separation of “aliens” from the regular class is because the students with disabilities are considered incompetent, especially in terms of cognitive abilities. Kliewer (1998) gives an example of one of his students named Melissa. Melissa’s mother wanted Melissa to participate in a reading class, but Kliewer argued that Melissa was mentally retarded which implied that she was defective and could not participate in a reading class. Also, Kliewer gives an example of a student with Down syndrome, called Mia, who was alienated throughout her school life and was only allowed access to special education. This denied her an opportunity to engage in activities and classes that were of interest to her. The second metaphor is “squatter”. This metaphor is used to describe how students with disabilities are included in the regular classroom “because all people have a democratic right to participate in the community (Kliewer, 1998),” but are accorded minimum participation in the classroom due to their disabilities. Squatters are viewed as semi-competent, which is the reason why they are provided with low-level, limited participation in a regular class. Like the aliens, squatters are also seen as burdens to the social and educational system. They are treated as if their special educational needs make them lesser and as such, they have nothing much to contribute to society. The third metaphor is “citizen”. This metaphor refers to how students with disabilities are treated equally with non-disabled students. They have been accepted by society and the school community....