(2) the actions of the school official unduly influenced the team’s decision and (1) the school district failed to consider the particular facts preceding the disciplinary incident and/or why the behavior may have occurred The district court, upholding the hearing officer’s findings, agreed that: The hearing officer found in favor of the parents. The parents challenged the outcome of the manifestation determination in a due process hearing. The IEP team ultimately determined that the student’s actions were not a manifestation of his disability because “physical aggression is not a symptom of ADHD, no one had observed aggressive behavior prior to this incident, and aggressive assault was not typical of the student.” When describing the behavior of the student, the assigned supervisor of special education used the terms “assault” and “refused directive.” Further, the supervisor partially completed the section on whether the school district failed to implement the student’s IEP, by marking “No.”ĭuring the manifestation determination hearing, the IEP team reviewed the manifestation determination review sheet and made handwritten changes, including a note that the student’s medication had been adjusted within the prior month. Prior to the manifestation determination, the assigned supervisor of special education completed the manifestation determination review sheet. The school district defined the student’s actions as an assault and scheduled disciplinary proceedings and a manifestation determination. The school district conducted an investigation, which included obtaining statements only from the teachers who witnessed the incident. In Z.B, the student, diagnosed with ADHD, allegedly assaulted a teacher. All relevant members of the student’s IEP team must be present. A manifestation determination hearing must occur within ten (10) days of the date that the school district takes disciplinary action that constitutes a change of educational placement. A manifestation determination, as the chief protection afforded to special education students in the disciplinary context, is the process school districts must conduct when considering the exclusion of an eligible student with a disability or a child thought to have a disability. Recently, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania addressed the need for a thorough analysis when conducting a manifestation determination. Click here to download a pdf of the article
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |