All Activity

Are School Staff Allowed to Talk to the IEE Assessor Without the Parent? Short answer: Technically, yes. But only within reason. If you signed a general consent for the IEE, that often includes permission for the assessor to observe your child and communicate with school staff to complete the evaluation. That’s standard. However... What’s NOT okay? Using those communications to have off-the-record conversations about services, placement, eligibility, or future decisions before you—the parent—are brought in The district stalling or making decisions behind closed doors based on those communications Contacting the IEE assessor after the report is completed to try to spin or reshape interpretation before the IEP team discusses it So while a quick follow-up like, “Hey, what did you observe again?” might be within bounds if it’s part of the evaluator’s clarification, it starts getting shady if it’s being used to delay your FBA IEE or influence decisions before the meeting. What You’re Describing? Pattern of Delay and Noncompliance You requested an IEE. They dragged it out for over a year. They denied your initial choices (common stall tactic). Now, they’re reaching out to the assessor privately after the IEE is done. And they’re using those conversations to decide if they’ll even allow another IEE (FBA). That’s not collaboration. That’s obstruction. Here’s What You Can Say (In Writing): “I was recently informed that the district contacted the IEE assessor to discuss his observation outside of a scheduled IEP meeting. I did not give specific permission for post-report discussions outside the IEP process. I would like any further communication with the IEE evaluator to include me, as I am a required member of the IEP team. Additionally, I would like a written response regarding my request for an IEE in the area of FBA. Please consider this a formal follow-up request.” And you’re allowed to add some spice: “Given the timeline of delays and the district's previous refusal to accept qualified assessors I proposed, I am increasingly concerned about the lack of transparency and good faith.” Don’t Forget: Under IDEA, when you request an IEE, the school must respond without unnecessary delay—by either agreeing to the IEE or filing for due process to prove theirs was sufficient. Sitting in silence while they “talk to the assessor” is not a legal response.

You’re right to pause and question this, especially since you've already requested special education testing—and that’s the bigger issue here. First Things First: Your Evaluation Request You mentioned you've asked for her to be evaluated for special education. If you made that request in writing, the school is legally obligated to move forward—regardless of any accommodations they’re trying to tack on in the meantime. Accommodations (like oral testing) don’t take the place of a full evaluation. So let’s start with this: Confirm that your evaluation request was submitted in writing. If not—do it now. Email it to the principal and/or special education coordinator, and keep a copy. The “Oral Testing for ADHD” Suggestion Let’s be real: the fact that they say “most of their ADHD students are orally tested” is a red flag. That’s cookie-cutter accommodation thinking, not individualized support. And it contradicts what they also said: she has no reading issues. So… why oral testing? Here’s how to think about it: Pros of Oral Testing Can reduce pressure if a student has test anxiety or struggles with reading comprehension Might help if a student processes information better when heard rather than read Cons of Oral Testing in Your Case It doesn’t address the root cause: If your daughter is struggling due to attention, executive functioning, or processing challenges, oral testing just masks the issue It won’t fix disruptive behavior, academic delays, or social/emotional needs It might be used to delay or avoid giving her an IEP or more comprehensive support If your daughter is showing poor academic progress and behavior challenges, that is much bigger than just needing a test read aloud. This is exactly the situation where IDEA kicks in—and they need to evaluate to determine eligibility for an IEP. So here’s your move: Politely decline the oral testing for now, or agree only as a temporary measure while you wait for the evaluation. Say something like: “We appreciate the accommodation offer, but this doesn’t address the core concerns we have. We are requesting a full evaluation under IDEA to determine if she qualifies for specially designed instruction.”

YES—what you’re describing absolutely could warrant an IEP. You're not just being protective or overly cautious—you're seeing real, documented barriers to access, despite the school handing out “good grades” like they prove everything is fine. (Spoiler: they don’t.) “Effective Progress” ≠ “Good Grades” Schools love to lean on grades to show a student is “doing fine.” But under IDEA, “effective progress” means progress appropriate for the student, considering their unique needs—not just whether they’re pulling an A on a worksheet with 80% of it reduced or dictated to someone else. You said it yourself: "How can a 6th grader who doesn’t write their own essay or have the work reduced 80% be making effective progress?" Exactly. He’s accessing the curriculum through intense modification and scaffolding—which is fine! But that’s the definition of needing specially designed instruction (aka, an IEP). Dictation ≠ Writing Instruction Adding dictation as a 504 accommodation isn’t a fix—it’s a band-aid. Yes, it helps with access, but it doesn’t address the underlying skill deficit in written expression. Kids with dysgraphia and executive functioning issues like ADHD often need explicit, specialized instruction in: Organizing ideas Developing paragraphs Mechanics and syntax Planning, drafting, and revising That's instructional support, not just an access tool. And that’s where pull-out or push-in ELA support through an IEP comes in. When a student is writing “I am stupid” on tests, shutting down during writing tasks, and visibly distressed during classwork, that’s not just a mental health issue, it’s a symptom of a mismatch between what he’s being asked to do and what his current supports can actually address. Yes, he has access to the adjustment counselor through his 504, but that doesn’t resolve the instructional mismatch and the writing-based performance anxiety. These need to be addressed together, not siloed off. What to Bring to the Meeting Data + Documentation Bring copies of the assignments that were reduced, the math test with the “I’m stupid” note, and any communications showing how much support he’s needing just to get through assignments. Highlight Skill Deficits, Not Grades Say: “We’re not seeing independent skills. We’re seeing workarounds. That’s not the same as progress.” Use IDEA Language “My child requires specially designed instruction in written expression to make meaningful progress in the general education curriculum. Accommodations alone are no longer sufficient.” Ask for SDI Goals Even if they push for just a 504 revision, ask: “What’s the school’s plan for directly teaching writing? How will that be tracked and measured? Bottom line: this is exactly the kind of situation IDEA was written for. A child who’s smart, but struggling because they’re being patched through instead of taught in the way they need. You're absolutely right to push for an IEP, and you’ve already laid the groundwork beautifully with your eval requests.

My son is in 6th grade and has several qualifying diagnoses (Autism, Health (ADHD), Specific Learning Disability (Dysgraphia), and Anxiety). He has been succeeding with a very extensive 504 plan, but things have recently taken a turn for the worst. He is currently unable to write essays at school both for a graded essay and for MCAS (state standardized testing). Further, he became distressed working on an ELA assignment where he had to come up with 8-10 quotes showing character development. The teacher changed it to 1-2 for him due to the amount of distress he was displaying. Additionally, he also wrote that he is stupid on a math test because he didn't understand what was being asked in the bonus question on the exam. His teacher reprinted the question and re-worded it. He got the question correct and got a perfect score on the test. We just put in a request for an academic evaluation in writing and OT evaluations because of the dysgraphia diagnosis and the recent struggles with writing. They are also doing two observations as part of this evaluation: one by the OT and one by the special education teacher. He had a psychoed evaluation done last year as well as an outside neuropsych, but he was doing better mentally. Teachers keep saying we need to add accommodations to his 504, but it seems like he'd really benefit from writing support. Right now, they want to add the ability to dictate his writing as an accommodation. His grades are good and they say he's making effective progress, but how can a 6th grader who doesn't write their own essay or have the work reduced 80% be making effective progress? Again, they are willing to update the 504 with new accommodations. We have a meeting in a couple of weeks, but I feel like he really needs pull out ELA support (or at least push-in support) in addition to the meetings with the adjustment counselor which are in his current 504 plan. Wouldn't you say that this warrants an IEP? How do I convince school that he's not making effective progress when they are giving him grades indicating that he is at grade level?

I forgot to add that parents are not members of the 504 team so the school gets to put what they want on a 504. With an IEP, parents get a vote. With a 504, they don't.

I'd send an email: Dear School- Accommodations on a 504 should be supported by information on a student's need. When we meet next week, can you please bring the data showing XXX's need to switch from written tests to oral tests so the 504 team can discuss this recent change. I'm suggesting an email so the school is prepared to answer your question and not say 'I'll get back to you on that' at the meeting.

From what I've been told in the trainings I've taken, you are only allowed one FBA per year. This might not apply to you/your state. This is 1000% my guess: Could RSD get the person who did the completed IEE to do an FBA IEE based on the observations they did when they observed for the IEE you will meet about next month? Based on what you posted, I'm thinking this was what the conversation between the evaluator & RSD was about. I think that when an evaluator does a lot of IEEs in a SD, they do develop a relationship of sorts. This is OK. Professionals in the same industry can & do develop working relationships. The evaluator can still be able to be unbiased when they have a working relationship with a district. Yes, they are allowed to talk to each other without parent permission or the parent being present. Evaluators don't just show up & observe. They are going to arrange a time that works for the school and will hopefully be a good time so the behavior they want to see will occur. There are general ed FBAs that a school can do w/o parent permission. With this, a BIP/PBSP can be written for a student who doesn't have an IEP. A 1:1 aide is an accommodation so it is something that can go on a 504. Lastly, I'll ask if the person who did the OT IEE has school OT credentials? Schools listen to school people more than they listen to medical people. A student might medically need OT weekly and not have a need for OT at school. Given the school OT didn't seem to have an interest in what was on the OT IEE report, one reason could be that the person who wrote the report does not have school credentials.

I do have some feed back from the school though it is not as plain as it can be. The proposed 504 accommodation change from written testing to oral testing is for regular class room work. The school went on to explain how the oral testing works. But the response did not answer our question of why the change. We will not send another email for clarity. There is a meeting scheduled this month and we will address it then. We have signed a consent for a Full Individual Evaluation and they said that it will be a psychological evaluation to determine if she has an Emotional Disability. If it is positive for Emotional Disability, then they can proceed with a FBA , then develop a BIP to be apart of 504 or IEP.

Are the school and an IEE assessor allowed to have conversations regarding observations before the meeting to determine additional services/ assessments, without including the parent? We are in the process of an IEE with the Riverside school district for my son. It's not going well- the district has drug the process on for over a year and I finally agreed to use the psychoeducational assessor on their list (who my advocate recommended) after they shot down multiple other psychologists I requested. The assessment is complete and submitted but we don't have our meeting to discuss it until May. I have also requested an IEE for the FBA but the school hasn't replied, and then said they need to contact the IEE psychologist for more info before deciding if they can approve the FBA. I emailed the IEE psychologist who said the school did reach out to him, "They were just asking about my observations when I observed him." We already had a meeting to discuss the IEE for OT and the meeting was awful- the school OT refused to even put OT consultation into the current 504, basically the team gaslight everything- the OT IEE recommended weekly services and a vision assessment. Is that conversation allowed to happen without the parent being included? I never provided permission for it specifically BUT did sign other consents for the IEE itself. The district has not overall been acting in good faith throughout this process, hence my apprehension. My son currently doesn't have an IEP- the IEE we haven't had the meeting for does recommend an IEP for OHI and SLD- the goal is also for him to have a 1:1 aide given his behavioral support needs (he currently has a part time aide under his 504. This school district is bizarre). He has been suspended once last year and once this year (1st grade), and has multiple "incidents" in his permanent record.

Emotional/Behavioral should include an executive functioning component. But you can ask this question to be sure. As far as the "oral testing" for special education, the school has to go by the testing protocols. If they allow for oral testing, then you shouldn't need to sign anything. I wouldn't sign anything that allows them to change the test protocols.

In my post above, I listed the tests, from the document that I have, that school plan to use in testing. Do any of the above tests overlap or provide similar data as executive functioning tests? I have a long way to go in learning this process and will take the bumps and curves as they come. And BTW, I'm very thankful for all who have replied to this post. I'm sure there is much more on this site that I need to dig into.

Yes I was referring to special education testing. My though process is that if she is reading well in the class room (which includes class room testing) why switch to oral testing for special ed. testing? I think it should be demonstrated first that special ed. tests are hard for her to understand or perhaps a new format and it's taking too, too long to complete. Prior to me replying to this forum, I did send an email to the school for clarification.

This strikes me as a bizarre step. I see no good reason to go to oral testing if she's able to test typically.

My son has ADHD & dysgraphia. Oral testing was a game changer for him. Given that it took longer for him to write, he did better with being able to voice his answers instead of writing them. If your child is being disruptive during testing, taking tests in another room might be a good thing. If testing orally keeps her focused and prevents her from leaving questions unanswered, it could help bring her grades back up to where they were. I post this a lot: What's in the IEP should be based on data. If there is no data to support the need for classroom tests to be given orally, it shouldn't be an accommodation on her IEP. I don't see this being assessed as part of the special ed testing but it could be part of the observations they are doing. With a medical ADHD diagnosis, I would expect the school to assess executive functioning. Social skills might also be an area to assess.

Ok. It seems we were confused and thought you were referring to the special education testing when you said "oral testing." But you mean the school wants to give her oral, rather than written, tests in the classroom because of her ADHD. I haven't heard of this being something to consider for students with ADHD, but maybe because it "forces" them to stay focused more than if they're sitting in front of paper or a computer taking a test? Whatever the reason, I would ask them to explain their thought process on this change - whether you ask for that in an email or during a meeting. You did say her grades are dropping, so it could be in response to that? Since you are wanting a behavioral plan, I would ask that the emotional/behavioral testing include an FBA (Functional Behavior Assessment).

Ok this is what I have in my documents. I hope this is what you are referring to. 1. LANGUAGE: Speech and language skills, voice and fluency. Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation, Auditory Discrimination, Test of Language Developement and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 2. PHYSICAL: Vision, hearing, medical examination by a physician. 3. SOCIOLOGICAL: Parent interview and/or questionnaire. 4. EMOTIONAL/BEHAVIORAL: Formal and /or informal assessment of her social and emotional adjustments and interpersonal relationships. Parent, teacher, observations, student interview. 5. COGNITIVE/INTELLECTUAL/ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR: Wechsler Intelligence Scales, Woodcock-Johnson, and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. 6. EDUCATIONAL/DEVELOPMENTAL PERFORMANCE: Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement for reading, math,and language and Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. 7. Assistive Technology: Informal and/or formal observations to determine student's needs and services to access areas and functions within the educational environment. To add to my original post, my daughter has been a good student academically. With her ADHD, she has been a handful from day one. Grades started to drop, school calling about disruptions, and her not doing her work. It was my suggestion that she receive special education and include a behavioral plan. As for as the oral testing, I don't understand where that is coming from. It seems to me if you take tests in the regular class room and do ok, why change now? Whenever we do have a meeting I will certainly ask. And by the way, the school did say that we didn't have to have a meeting for the change. If we agree, they will send us the papers to sign. Anyway I would love to get some good feedback. One other thing. Just my reading on this site, I have changed my opinion about the waivers that's on our forms. The question had to do with the 15 day waiver and one response was the waivers are there for the parents to have time to review the plan, change or proposal. It is very likely that I will not be checking that box in the future because there is too, too much that we don't know. Thank you.

Special ed assessments - I believe this is the 'oral testing' you are asking about. Every test has a testing protocol. You'd need to know what test is being given to know if oral testing is an option per the protocol. I have a few thoughts on this. (1) ADHD can co-occur with LD. If the student has an LD in reading, the results might not be accurate. (2) Some kids will mess up with filling out Berger Dots - either accidentally or on purpose. Doing the testing orally means there's an adult making sure the student's choices are accurately recorded. (3) Some kids will look to please the adult they're working with. It's possible that a student might not be honest with oral testing (which is why you need to follow the testing protocol). (4) If the evaluator had a bad experience with (1) or (2), they might opt to give the test orally as it's a waste of time and resources to give an assessment and the results aren't accurate. It also makes them look bad. Keep in mind that the student doing the Connors or BASC is one part of the special ed assessment. Parents and teachers will also do rating scales. With other evaluations, the only protocol is the student answering the evaluator's questions. I believe that a lot of IQ tests are like this.

What areas are checked on the consent form to be evaluated? That could make a difference. I would also ask what evaluations are being used for each area and then look up online to see if an oral version is appropriate.

Hello, My daughter is on a 504 plan but I have requested for her to be tested for Special Education because of poor progress with grades and her disruptive behavior. The school has us to agree to oral testing , adding that most of their ADHD students are orally tested. I have put them off but got a call last Friday so I really don't know the pros & cons of doing so. She has no problem reading from our observation and the school's given statement.

Lack of progress, missing services, work that’s too easy or too hard… there are so many red flags. How did you know your child’s IEP needed changes? What were the signs?

Preferential seating. Written as something to be established by both student and teacher so that it actually works. I know it's often a joke these days, but when it's done thoughtfully, it's wonderful.

I personally find it a beauty of a plan. Be prepared for the school coming back and offering options to stay in general ed (though if the issues and distractions in the general ed classroom are as big a deal as it seems, I don't think they'll have much of a case).

I'm curious if the school evaluated this student for an emotional disability that is secondary to the dyslexia diagnosis. Can they say that an outside therapist is needed if they didn't evaluate? I'd say no. I know that disabled students can live in fear of their disability being discovered where they end up getting teased and/or bullied. It's possible that outside therapy is needed but it's also true that this student might need a safe place and trained person to talk to when feeling anxious. (If this isn't in the IEP, the IEP might not be FAPE.) I've also seen where dyslexic students thrive when in a school that specializes in remediating dyslexia because they are not going to be singled out due to the disability plus they will tend to make better progress because every teacher is either trained to accommodate or trained to remediate (or both). My feeling is that talking to the student and doing your best to figure out where support is lacking is great data to bring to a meeting. Specific examples can go a long way to demonstrate where FAPE isn't being provided to the student as well as how this issue might not be present if all classmates were similarly disabled.

You’re already walking into that meeting with a solid plan. Honestly? Great job on how you’ve framed this—especially your focus on FAPE, Child Find, and using legal precedent. You’re doing exactly what a good advocate should: connecting the dots between the emotional impact, the lack of access, and the school’s legal obligations. Here are a few ideas you might add to your strategy—some are small tweaks, some are additional leverage: 6. School-Based Counseling IS a Related Service under IDEA If the school is denying counseling with a flippant “she doesn’t need it,” ask: Where is that determination documented in the IEP or any evaluation? If it’s not in the IEP or based on an evaluation, that’s a procedural violation. Under IDEA, counseling is a related service that must be provided if it’s needed for the student to benefit from special education. Suggested language: “Given the documented emotional impact of her learning challenges and current refusal to attend school, counseling should be added to the IEP as a related service. This is consistent with 34 CFR § 300.34.” 7. Demand Data (Or Highlight the Lack of It) Has the team provided any progress monitoring or data on emotional or behavioral functioning? If not, ask: “How is the team determining that current supports are appropriate when there is no consistent data being gathered on emotional regulation, anxiety, or attendance?” Bonus: If attendance data shows a pattern, use it to demonstrate lack of access to instruction, a cornerstone of FAPE. 8. Assistive Technology (AT) Consideration If she’s refusing to attend due to anxiety, but still shows academic potential, request an AT assessment for remote access to instruction while the team works on placement. No, it's not a long-term solution—but it's a bridge that shows you're trying to keep her engaged while they get their act together. 9. Refer to OCR and State Guidance You might also drop this little reminder: The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has repeatedly stated that anxiety and school avoidance are not “voluntary” behaviors, and districts must address the emotional health of students under both IDEA and Section 504. 10. And Finally—Document Parent Requests for Comp Ed If she’s missed substantial instructional time due to the district’s delay in addressing her emotional needs, mention that the parent reserves the right to request compensatory education. No need to demand it yet—but drop it as a breadcrumb. You're already 10 steps ahead of where most teams expect you to be. Add a little more heat to that sauce with these points, and you’ll make it very clear: this isn’t just a “kid with test anxiety”—this is a denial of FAPE, a Child Find fail, and a procedural mess waiting to become a legal problem for them.

Have a third grade student that is refusing to go to school and the district is not helping that much. The child has an IEP for a learning disability (she has Dyslexia) and also has Anxiety. The struggles with learning are leading to extreme anxiety. School said she "doesn't need school-based counseling." Advocating for the parents this week and this is our position: The focus of our position is that Student’s current educational setting is no longer appropriate due to the increasing emotional and behavioral challenges she is experiencing as a result of her anxiety, combined with her diagnosed learning disability (Dyslexia). These factors are preventing her from accessing her education, which constitutes a denial of a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Key Points I Will Present at the Meeting: 1. Student’s Emotional Needs Must Be Reassessed Immediately The school has been made aware of X’s increasing school avoidance, emotional distress, and anxiety-related behaviors for months. Despite this, no emotional or behavioral supports have been initiated by the school team. We will request a comprehensive re-evaluation, including assessments in the areas of Emotional Regulation Impairment and Other Health Impairment, as these are suspected areas of disability. 2. The Current Setting Is Not Appropriate X is overwhelmed by loud noises, frequent changes in routines, and struggles with comparison to peers. These sensory and emotional stressors are increasing her school-based anxiety and school refusal. X is not emotionally or psychologically available to learn in the current environment. 3. A Therapeutic Out-of-District Placement Must Be Considered We will present a legal case (E.K. v. Elizabeth City BOE) in which a similar student was eventually placed in a therapeutic school after persistent school refusal due to anxiety and other emotional disabilities. In that case, the judge ruled that the district failed to meet the student’s needs because they delayed appropriate evaluations and interventions. Like E.K., Student X requires a small, supportive, therapeutic learning environment where she can receive emotional and behavioral support throughout the school day in order to make meaningful progress. 4. The School Must Fulfill Its Child Find Obligation Under federal and state law, the district is required to identify and evaluate all students who may have a disability. Given the clear signs of emotional dysregulation and the documented impact on X’s ability to attend and benefit from school, the district is now on notice that X needs further evaluation. We will make a formal request for this reevaluation in writing during the meeting. 5. The Goal Is Support, Not Punishment X’s refusal is not oppositional; it is rooted in fear, anxiety, and frustration. Continued placement in a setting that is too overwhelming is not only ineffective—it is emotionally damaging. She deserves a learning environment that meets both her academic and emotional needs. Can you think of anything else I should present or take into account? Thank you so much!