Agree to Disagree??

In case you ares somehow unaware, we are in the thick of IEP season.  Yes, school is out soon, but the season extends well into the summer, much to the dismay of everyone involved.  In an economy filled with forclosures and property tax caps, it seems that school districts are becoming more "creative" in stretching their student stipends.  Our local school made a series of cuts for this year that were pretty painless, at least from the parent perspective....they eliminated all but one of the assistant principal positions at the elementaries instead of eliminating teachers.  That is a decision that I can support wholeheartedly.  However, when we see this "creativity" at the case conference table, it becomes inappropriate.  WHY?  We are required (and parents are equal members of the team) to devise an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for every student with a qualifying disability.  Cost cannot be a factor.  It is simply not allowed.  When I say it is not allowed, it is inappropriate for a school admin to tell a parent, "We don't have money for that!!"  Yet I've heard it more than once, and I know it is not uncommon.  Since I am not an attorney, I would advise you to research the law for yourself to learn WHY that is inappropriate.  ;)  So what happens when the school (who has a limited amount of money to work with) can't use money as an excuse to not provide an appropriate program??  It becomes the large invisible elephant in the room.  Everyone knows it's there, but no one talks about it!  When Congress first passed IDEA, they mandated that public schools provide FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education) to students with disablities.  Yet, they have NEVER fully funded this mandate.  Therein lies the rub.  However, I remain unconvinced that special education students are a burden, an "encroachment" even, to the general operating budget of the school.  The school gets an extra stipend for special education students, depending on the eligibility category or categories each student meets.  Autism was the biggest payout the last time I checked.  Some students need a LOT of support, some students need little to no support and most are somewhere in between.  I read an article in the local paper about our school bragging that a large percentage of the special education students here are in general education classrooms.  On the surface, we think "Awesome, that's the way it should be."  Yes and no.  When a student can be successful and thrive in a gened classroom, that is a glorious win for everyone involved, especially that student.  But all too often we see kids being shoved into a gened classroom without appropriate supports.  This is sometimes done in an effort to conserve special education resources for students with higher need.  Yes, these kids can frequently learn to sit in the gened class without being disruptive, but if they are not actually LEARNING, then it becomes inappropriate.  Son 1 is one of the kids that needs very little support to be successful.  He is able to fly under the radar on most days, and most of his friends don't know he's on the spectrum.  There is NO WAY the school spends his stipend on him, and in his case, it would be inappropriate.  Son 2 is somewhere in the middle and has moderate behavioral and academic need.  With the supports he requires to be successful, the school probably does spend his stipend on him.  And I know there are students that require more support than what the stipend covers.  So it becomes a large math problem.  The school has to figure out what they can spend on average per child, and then try to figure out how to spend less in order to cover the costs of students with higher need.  This is why school admins will frequently balk at things like a 1:1 aide, appropriate transportation, specialized curriculums, and ((GASP)) private schools.  If they can say, "Oh we think a 1:1 would make him less independent.", which is ridiculous if the aide is properly trained but I digress, then they can suggest putting him in the ABCDEFG classroom instead.  And if the parent agrees, that is that.  IF the parent agrees....the committee has to agree by law.  Parent and school cannot simply agree to disagree when it comes to the content of the IEP.  This is where conflict can arise.  Parent thinks Johnny needs L, M, N, O, an P, and school maintains that H, I, J, and K will do just fine.  In many instances the school has decided that H, I, J, and K are the cheapest way to at least make it look like the kid is getting an appropriate education.  Hopefully a compromise can be reached with as little conflict as possible, while still getting the kid an appropriate education.  When there is conflict between home and school, it frequently becomes a lose-lose proposition for the child.