Accommodation removed as a denial of FAPE to OTHER students

[Steph]

The district is dramatically altering an accommodation claiming that the accommodation constitutes a denial of FAPE to the OTHER students. The back story: for several years our 16yo son has had an accommodation in his IEP that he may redo any assignment or test where he scores below a 70%. The school psychologist called me about two weeks ago to discuss his upcoming IEP and said the school would like to lower that threshold to 60 saying that they want him to mature into taking on more responsibility himself. I said I would consider lowering the threshold to 65%. Had the IEP last Thursday and they now say any redo threshold  higher than a 60% constitutes a denial of FAPE to the OTHER students, saying it gives my son an unfair grade advantage. I am preparing to write the PWN. I have some arguments lined up, such as a district policy denies the “individual” in IEP;  that, by their logic, ANY accommodation could be denied as “unfair” to other students (even though that is completely against the definition of an accommodation—something he needs to get FAPE in his education is not unfair); we are interested in mastery of the material, and grades are just a measurement; and data shows that he uses this accommodation at the 70% threshold (IEP is s opposed to be data driven). I do personally know of another 10th grader (who I’ll keep nameless even though the guardian told me) who has been offered 65%, so know it’s not being evenly applied, but am not sure bringing up other kids will help or hinder? Any other areguments I’m missing? I’m just flabbergasted. 

[EmilyM]

Personally, I've never cared for the opportunity to retake an assessment at X score because without careful planning it rarely seems to be more about mastery than getting the score, but no matter how you shake it, I don't see how FAPE is being denied to other students. 

I think if you can collect proof this is being used for the goal of content mastery, that may help your case. 

[Carolyn Rowlett]

FAPE is "free appropriate public education."  Your son's ability to retake tests at ANY threshold does not affect other students' right to an education in any way, shape, or form.  As far as their "unfair advantage" argument, anything that is deemed necessary by the team for a student to get FAPE should be given regardless of how the school thinks it may affect other students.  (Accordingly, my suggestion would be to not bring up the other student, since as your correctly point out, IEP's are based on the "Individual."  But you could ask for their WRITTEN policy on this.  There is no way they have one because you can't pre-determine what might be needed in an IEP for every individual student.)

Having said all that, I agree with Emily that retakes can be more about the score than content mastery, so make sure that is what you stress and have data for.  It might help if the accommodation was more specific - "someone will go over the missed items on the test with student to explain why answers were wrong before the retake" - or something more eloquent that what I just came up with. 

[JSD24]

If you are looking to fight this, I feel contacting the disability rights group for your state would be the place to start.  Anything below 70 is failing so my feeling is that 70 is a good threshold for retakes.  (My district gives grades A, B, C & F.  70-80 is a C, below is an F because we don't have D.  If your district has D and a D is passing, this might be their logic.)

Realistically, the I in IEP is for Individualized.  The school having one set cut off for this seems like predetermination & the inability to individualize.

The ability to demonstrate mastery and have points added to a test should he get between 60 & 70 might be a way around their rules.

It's not fair that the other students aren't disabled.  Seems like an advantage to them in taking tests.  Can the school do something like they do in horse racing where better horses have to carry a heavier jockey & saddle?

[Jgrubb]

 A test is supposed to help the teacher.  The teacher is supposed to see if there is an item or items that were missed by several students.  If that’s the case, then the teacher needs to reteach the material covered in the question(s).  Maybe, it needs to be presented to the IEP Committee, not in the IEP, that if other students are failing then the material needs to be retaught to everyone who didn’t pass the test.   Then, everyone needs to be tested again.  The teacher(s) can test over the same material but with a different test.  The same thing is true for assignments.  If a lot of people are failing assignments and assessments, the problem isn’t the students or your child’s IEP.

[MizzG]

I agree with JGrubb.  As the parent of a child with other abilities that warranted an IEP, I walked a fine line.  On one side I didn’t want my child treated differently because of the other abilities and on the other side I was asking schools to treat him differently for that same reason.  What JGrubb has described is a Universal Design for Learning approach that can level the playing field for all students.  However, I would first advocate for a pre-test to determine if all the students understand the concepts to be presented on the test.  If the results of the pre-test determined that my child was an outlier, I would consider his other ability (ADHD) and request individualized 1:1 or small group instruction with the test given immediately after instruction.

[Backroads]

1 hour ago, Carolyn Rowlett said:

Having said all that, I agree with Emily that retakes can be more about the score than content mastery, so make sure that is what you stress and have data for.  It might help if the accommodation was more specific - "someone will go over the missed items on the test with student to explain why answers were wrong before the retake" - or something more eloquent that what I just came up with. 

It's a good accommodation. I saw one that allowed for a review mini group/1:1 before the retake, and I thought that addressed the point of learning the material.

[Lisa Lightner]

I dislike the retaking tests accommodation, mostly on principle.

Why are we waiting for kids to get below a 60 or 70 before we offer assistance?

 

https://adayinourshoes.com/retaking-test-accommodation/

 

[driven_cosmos]

At some point if too many assignments or tests are below that threshold, the student ends up spending a lot of time focusing on retakes and could end up falling behind on new content...especially in HS.  A few options you could consider:

If you really believe in the retakes, you could suggest that the original score and score on the retest be averaged to produce the final grade.  Or that he be allowed X number of retakes per quarter and would need to decide when best to use and advocate for them.  This might address the district's perspective about "taking more responsibility."

If this is more about content mastery, you could ask that the specific skills that he scored below a 65 / 70 on be targeted for reteaching.  Perhaps those specific skills could be tested again after reteaching to determine content mastery.

The pre-test is a good idea too.  The only challenge I can see is that if the pre-test showed many students having difficulties and the teacher reteaches the skill with the entire group, what happens if that group reteaching didn't really end up helping this specific student?