A:
As you know, a new reauthorization
of IDEA took place in October 2004 and became a State Law in
all States on July 1, 2005. The law has moved away from using
discrepancy models to identify children with specific learning
disabilities. The school is not required to determine if the
child has a discrepancy between achievement and intellectual
ability to establish that the child has a specific learning
disability and needs special education services. The school
may use response to intervention to determine if the child responds
to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation
process. (Section 1414(b)(6). The law further states that information
from the evaluations will be used to determine "the educational
needs of the child" and "the present levels of academic
achievement and related developmental needs of the child."
(Section 1414(c)(1).
Here is the exact citation from
the law that you can bring to your school: "... a local
educational agency shall not be required to take into consideration
whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement
and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension,
written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension,
mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning." (Section
1414(b)(6). In addition, the law states that "in determining
whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local
educational agency may use a process that determines if the
child responds to scientific, research-based intervention"
as a part of the required evaluation procedures (Section 1414(c)(1).
Let me tell you that even when "discrepancy
formula" was in force, it was hardly applicable to our
children. The scientific research and clinical practice have
long ago proved that neither low nor high IQ scores may be used
to exclude a child from consideration as LD; and the absence
of a numeric discrepancy alone cannot be used as criterion for
excluding or including a child into special education program.
Thus, the IQ scores depressed by a disorder in basic psychological
processing (this is a case of many of our children), cannot
be used in any ability-achievement comparisons, because the
same disorder in basic psychological processing that caused
low achievement had also depressed the IQ score. But, again,
the whole concept of "discrepancy" is not relevant
now.
So, your arguments for LD determination
should be based on the following basic premises:
- Neurological weakness that has relevancy
to educational setting, such as fatigue during cognitive efforts,
nervous tension, decreased memory and attention span (needs
to be presented in a professional psychological report and/or
your letter).
- Deficiency of age-appropriate cognitive
skills and processes and limited cognitive language, which
result in poor response to instruction in a mainstream educational
setting (this, again, must be properly described and substantiated
in a professional psychological report).
- Prolong history of deprivation, neglect,
substandard education, and institutionalization that have
exacerbated the above diagnosis (in reality, this is the true
cause of many LD conditions cognitively and language-wise,
but be careful with this statement - the new issue of IDEA
still keeps the famous "socio-economic" definition
as the basis for denying LD classification. From experience,
I know that a lot depends on how it is formulated - indeed,
"the one who masters the language, rules the Universe"
- as one old Greek philosopher wisely observed.
The bottom line is this: many of our children
need a proper educational classification, IEP, and supportive
services. Or, a retention together with remediation. All children
are entitled to an appropriate public education, which in the
case of many PI children includes a system of intensive and extensive
remediation. Any rejection of such remedial system for them constitutes,
in fact, the continuation of the same educational deprivation
and neglect that these children had been exposed to for so long
in their native country.
