Dear Ms. Jones

In life, we have crossed each other’s paths, and you have shown me my weaknesses to help me become a better person. I am always grateful for your guidance. Understanding my dark past and God’s blessing in making me whole again, I choose to not lash out in anger, hurt, or cynicism. Instead, I choose to devote my life to helping others. To the best of my ability, I have learned to defend the weak, the victimized, and the discouraged. I try to build, strengthen, and inspire parents in seeking and seeing the beauties in their child instead of the disabilities. Therefore, I was at Andy’s IEP meeting as an advocator by the request of Andy’s parents. Many things were done incorrectly in the written IEP and the meeting itself. I would like to share my observations and suggestions:

  1. No district employee may directly or indirectly use or attempt to use his/her official authority or influence to intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, coerce any person, including, but not limited to a teacher, related services provider, paraprofessional, aide, contractor, or subordinate for the purpose of interfering with that person’s effort to assist a parent or guardian of a special education student to obtain services or accommodations for that student. [Cal. Ed. Code Sec. 56046(a).] If a teacher or other employee of the district believes an administrator or other employee of the district has violated this prohibition, she can file a complaint with the State Department of Education and ask the Department for an investigation. [Cal. Ed. Code Sec. 56046(b).]
  • In the meeting, you ordered me in an aggressive and hostile tone of voice and with a finger pointed at me, “You! Stop it!” Because you know of my past abuse and have authority over me, you intimidated me. At that time, I could have easily fired right back, but the words of Nancy Guerrero, our director of SCCOE Special Education, echoed in my ears, “When we are fighting at the IEP, no one wins.” Therefore I held back my anger. I was too hurt to advocate for Andy effectively the rest of the meeting. I can file a complaint with CTA and the State Department of Education; however as the members of SCCOE, we are one, and I choose not to do that. I would ask you not to humiliate me like that again.
  1. As far as progress reports, the law say that progress reporting is to be set in the IEP and then the IEP is followed. So the responsibility for progress reporting is as specified in the IEP. Parents must be informed at least as often as parents of nondisabled children are informed of their children’s progress. [20 U.S.C. Sec. 1414(d); 34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.116 & 300.320; 5 C.C.R. Sec. 3042(b); Cal. Ed. Code Sec. 56345.]
  • In the meeting, you blamed the parents for not requesting the June & September progress reports. Andy’s parents should not be blamed at all. This is the SCCOE staff’s responsibilities. Andy is an EL student, and his parents have limited English. They don’t know the laws or understand the written paperwork unless someone interprets for them. Please have someone inform the parents in Vietnamese of both the meaning and the importance of these papers.
  1. Under Special Factors, the teacher wrote, “A behavior support plan is attached.”
  • The teacher should write the behavior support plan, present it, and obtain the agreement from the IEP team. She should not pull out the Behavior Support Plan that I wrote and that expired in 2013. Please have the BIP send it home for the parents and me to review.
  1. Parents must receive notices in their native language. [34 CFR 300.304; CA EC 56321.] The school must send prior notice to a parent FIFTEEN (15) days in advance. [34 CFR 300.304; EC 56321.]
  • If you look at the Notice of Meeting in English that was signed by the father on March 20 & April 2, you can immediately conclude that he has no knowledge of what he signed. In fact, the IEP was due on March 20, 2014; and the Notice of Meeting was given to the father on that same day. On the notice, the psychologist & specialist were invited, but they did not show up. The parents and I did not excuse them from the meeting. If they were there, the meeting might have taken a different turn where the parents and I would have had more support. As it was, I felt threatened by your order and was afraid to ask you to note that in the meeting notes (Form 7).
  1. School districts are required by federal and state law to provide copies of assessments and other educational records before an IEP meeting. [20 U.S.C. Sec. 1414(b) (4); 34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.562.] and [Cal. Ed. Code Sec. 56345.]
  • The parents did not receive any written IEP documents or data on Andy’s behaviors before the IEP meeting. If the parents had received the draft written IEP, I could have provided input to the new teacher of what needed to be corrected before the IEP meeting. The teacher should use the SANDI Booklet to assess Andy as SCCOE has directed and not just used her observation alone.
  1. Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) means that: To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities are educated with nondisabled children. [20 U.S.C. Sec. 1412 (a) (5) (A); 34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.114.] State law provides that special education students be provided with “maximum interaction with general school population” in a manner that is appropriate to the needs of both. [Cal. Ed. Code Sec. 56001 (g).] In addition, in arranging for the provision of services, such as lunch and recess, the school district shall ensure that children with disabilities participate with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate. [34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.117.]
  • I have come to Orchard several times during the school lunch both in the past and this year. I observed that the students are participating well and very appropriate with general peers during lunch recess. Then why does the teacher keep them in the classroom? In the meeting, the teacher said, “It is her choice.” If it is, then we (SCCOE) are violating the LRE laws. If the teacher needs support to mainstream students during lunch, she can either rearrange her staff‘s schedule or ask you for support. We should allow our students to be seen, to socialize, and to be a part of the school setting, and not be caged in.
  1. The parents of a student with disabilities are expected to be EQUAL PARTICIPANTS, along with school personnel, in developing, reviewing, and revising the student’s IEP. In fact, the IEP team must consider the parent’s inputs on their child’s strengths and their concerns for enhancing the child’s education. [34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.34and App. A. Q. 5.]
  • You refused to hear our concerns and inputs by ordering me, “You! STOP IT!” When this happens, you do not treat us as equal participants. Andy’s mom wants him to eat with his general peers and requests that a goal be addressed on this matter. If you disagree with Andy’s mom and me, you should just inform us about the rights of the parents on asking for a due process hearing. [20 USC 1415[6]; 34 CFR 300.507; EC 56501 and 56505[l].]

In my life, I have been taught to choose the right when a choice is placed before me. In doing the right things and complying to the laws, our hearts confide the safety and peace in our souls which gives us inspiration’s power from on high to succor the weak and edify one another. Since we have been blessed with knowledge of the laws and knowing right from wrong, I hope that we all do the right things to protect the rights of our students who have the need from us to defend them. We all win if we learn to speak kindly to one another and listen to others. Andy’s parents and I are looking forward to receiving a copy of Andy’s complete IEP with corrections and the Behavior Intervention Plan.

Sincerely,

Ngoc-Lan Pham