Overview: School Discipline of Students with Disabilities

1. Overview: School Discipline of Students with Disabilities

2. When the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (now IDEA) was enacted in 1975, a million children with disabilities were not receiving any education, and the educational opportunities of millions of others were inadequate for meeting their needs. The purpose of the Law has been to end that situation by guaranteeing that every child with a disability is guaranteed a right to a free and appropriate public education.

3. Students with disabilities have been no more likely than other students to exhibit antisocial behaviors, but they have been more vulnerable to harsh disciplinary decisions.

4. Zero tolerance policies are questioned, and denial of education is not a solution

5. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1997 offer a balanced approach

6. The Amendments add clarity and offer schools more flexibilityin intervening when students with disabilities violate behavior codes.

7. The procedures for implementing the IDEA Amendments are summarized as follows

8. Schools may remove a student with a disability for up to 10 days for any violation of school rules, as long as there is no pattern of continuing removals.

9. Removal for more than 10 consecutive school days, or a pattern of continuing removals that cumulate to more than 10 school days in a school year, constitutes a de facto change in placement.

10. When a removal that constitutes a change in placement is initiated, the student's IEP Team becomes involved to conduct a functional assessment and develop a behavioral intervention plan (or examine needs to modify any current plan).

11. School officials may order an appropriate alternative placement for up to 45 days at a time -- if a student (a) carries a weapon to school or a school function, or (b) knowingly possesses or uses illegal drugs or sells or solicits the sale of a controlled substance while at school or a school function.

12. Hearing officers may order additional interim alternative placements of up to 45 days if there remains a substantial likelihood that the student will injure self or others if returned to the previous placement.

13. School officials may at any time seek a court order to remove a child with a disability from his or her current school placement if they demonstrate on the basis of substantial evidence that the student is likely to cause injury in his/her current placement.

14. If the IEP Team concludes that a student's misconduct was not a manifestation of disability, the student can be disciplined in the same manner as nondisabled students, including suspension or expulsion.

15. However, the student must continue to receive a free, appropriate public education (as determined by the IEP Team) during the suspension or expulsion period.

16. School officials may report crimes committed by students with disabilities and transmit copies of special education and disciplinary reports to law enforcement authorities, just as they report crimes committed by nondisabled students.

17. The 1997 Amendments also recommended two methods for supporting positive behavior among all children in schools: functional behavioral assessment (which is a method for diagnosing behavior problems) and positive behavioral interventions

18. What must a school district do when removing a child with a disability from his or her current placement for the eleventh cumulative day in a school year? 

19. Beginning on the eleventh cumulative day in a school year that a child with a disability is removed from his or her current placement, the school district must achieving the goals set out in the child's IEP.

20. provide those services that school personnel in consultation with the child's special education teacher determine to be necessary to enable the child to appropriately progress in the general curriculum and appropriately advance toward

21. School personnel would determine where those services would be provided. This means that for the remainder of the removal that includes the eleventh day, and for any subsequent removals, services must be provided to the extent determined necessary, while the removal continues.

22. Not later than 10 business days after removing a child with a disability for more than 10 school days in a school year, the school district must:

23. Convene an IEP team meeting to develop abehavioral assessment plan if the district has not already conducted a functional behavioral assessment and implemented a behavioral intervention plan for the child.

24. If a child with a disability who is being removed for the eleventh cumulative school day in a school year already has a behavioral interventionplan:

25. The school district must convene the IEP team (either before or not later than 10 business days after first removing the child for more than 10 school days in a school year) to review the plan and its implementation, and modify the plan and its implementation as necessary to address the behavior.

26. A manifestation determination would not be required unless the removal that includes the eleventh cumulative school day of removal in a school year is a change of placement.

27. Recent Changes In the Laws as Amended by the 2004 Re-Authorization

28. Stay put.

29. Services to be received in interim alternative educational setting.

30. Under IDEA 2004, the student must be provided services to enable him or her to continue to participate in the general education curriculum and to progress toward meeting the goals in the IEP. The new provision replaced language requiring that a child in an interim alternative educational setting receive services and modifications, including those described in the student's current IEP which will enable the child to meet the goals in the IEP.

31. Manifestation Determination Review

32. Special Circumstances

33. The hearing officer in determining whether to remove a child because maintaining his/her current placement is substantially likely to result in injury to self or others is no longer required to consider whether the school district's proposed change in placement is based on a preponderance of the evidence

34. the amended statute no longer requires the hearing officer to consider whether the school has made reasonable efforts to minimize the risk of harm, including the use of supplementary aids and services.

35. These changes, to the degree they have the effect of punishing the child even if proper supports could have prevented the problem, arguably violate Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

36. 45 day limit

37. The 45 calendar day limit on the removal for these offenses has been changed to 45 school days, which is significantly longer [now 9 instead of 6 weeks of school at a critical time when students with disabilities are being held accountable for meeting high state standards.]

38. Functional Behavioral Assessments. The requirement for Functional Behavioral Assessments and Behavioral Intervention Plans are maintained in the discipline provisions

39. Case-by-case determination.

40. A paragraph has been added to the discipline provisions, which states that school personnel can consider any unique circumstances on a case-by-case basis when determining whether to change the placement of a child with a disability who violates a school code of conduct

41. This is a good provision for parents to quote when they are having trouble proving that their child's behavior is a manifestation of the disability.

42. It serves to remind the school personnel that common sense should prevail and all circumstances should be considered.