1. Know Your Meeting
-
All IEP meetings are not created equal. There are
many reasons to hold an IEP meeting, and there are different rules and
expectations for each scenario. It is important to have a basic understanding
of what you may be walking into when participating in an IEP meeting
-
Annual IEP Meeting
- Every child with an IEP is entitled to a yearly review of their program, and each of his or her team members, including parents are aware of the child’s abilities. The annual meeting is basically an update on how the program is working for the student. It should be relatively quick because the team is not there to discuss any significant program changes. Related service providers are may change their mandates as they see fit, but all instructional programming should remain the same.
- Annual meetings are generally less tense than other IEP meeting types, because everyone is usually on the same page about who and where the student is, and what the student needs.
- Initial Evaluation IEP/Ineligible for Special Education Services
-
The initial meeting is the very first IEP meeting held after the child is evaluated. This is the meeting where the team decides 1) whether the student has a disability and 2) whether that disability is
interfering with the student’s performance to the point that an IEP is needed.
-
This is usually the most emotionally charged IEP meeting type. Parents are often nervous or defensive about what will be said about their
children (or their parenting), and teachers can also be very passionate about what they believe
their student needs. There have been no determinations yet about what exactly
is impacting the student’s progress, and people can be very apprehensive about
what the outcomes will be.
-
It is important for school professionals to remain calm and be patient with parents as they process all the information. For many parents, this is a new experience, and it can be overwhelming. If there is something you, the school professional, are unclear about, do not prolong the discussion to satisfy your own confusion.
-
Example: Payton was given an evaluation to decide whether he needs special education services. The team has been talking for approximately 45 minutes, with the school psychologist reviewing the results from three different assessments with the parent. The team agrees that Payton needs an integrated class with a behavior checklist. The parents, who have been emotional throughout the meeting, agree with all recommendations. Payton's teacher, Ms. Clarke, asks how and when Payton's new teacher will implement this checklist, and begins to discuss all the things that could go wrong with implementation.
-
Ms. Clarke may have had good intentions with her questions, but this was the wrong time to present these concerns. First, Payton's parents have just received a lot of information, and are probably more interested in getting home to process everything they just heard. Second, it is the school's job to figure out how to implement special education services, and the IEP meeting is not the time to do it. Bringing up questions and concerns that can be addressed outside of the meeting after the recommendations have been agreed upon can add to the parents' anxiety or sensitivity and actually open up a new can of worms. It is not a fair or helpful move for anyone.
- Reevaluation/Triennial
- This type of meeting is generally somewhere between the initial and annual in terms of emotional intensity. A child is referred for a reevaluation for a number of reasons: the parent or school feels that the child is not in the appropriate setting, that they need additional services (e.g., speech or OT), or that that child needs less intensive support (e.g., moving from a special class to an Integrated class). The triennial, like the annual, is a process that the student is entitled to every three years to determine whether ihis or her current program continues to appropriately address the student’s needs. This may include updated testing or not, depending on the student’s progress and previous assessment history.
- Again, meeting intensity is often dependent on the professionals' and parents’ experiences leading up to and during the
evaluation process. If either the parent or teacher (or service provider or
clinician or district representative) has negative perceptions of any other
party, it is likely to be displayed during the IEP meeting. If the process
was generally smooth from start to finish, everyone is likely to be more in
tune and enjoy an engaging and productive meeting.
-
It is important to remember that, no matter
what kind of meeting it is, no matter what the history with that child or
parent looks like, the burden to remain professional and objective is ALWAYS on
the school (and its representatives), not the parent.
2. Know your Student – The Good, the Bad, and
the Evident
-
Every educator at the table should be
prepared to discuss the student’s needs objectively and professionally. There
should be evidence to back up whatever statement is made. Recommendations should be unbiased and not based on personal history or prejudice.
-
If a team member feels strongly about a recommendation, that team member is responsible to provide documentation (e.g., assessments, anecdotes, charts, etc.) to support their view. Emotions should have very little place in this discussion.
-
Example 1: Jimmy is in the second grade.
His teacher, Mrs. Applebaum says at his Initial IEP meeting that he is a
“non-reader.” She knows his older brother had an IEP and eventually ended up in a small class. Mrs. Applebaum has not submitted any test scores, and has a hard time
recalling interventions that she has implemented to support him in the
classroom. However, she insists that he would do better if he were in a smaller
classroom.
-
Example 2: Toni is in the third grade and has
had an IEP since the second grade. After being reevaluated to determine whether
speech should be added to her program, her team met in April to discuss the
results. Her teacher, Mr. Brighton said that Toni has made very little progress
since entering his integrated classroom in September. He provides her reading test scores from the beginning of the year, and discusses previously implemented
interventions. Despite his various attempts to improve Toni's performance, she remains almost right where she started at the beginning of the school year. Mr. Brighton believes that Toni should be in a smaller classroom whether
or not speech therapy is recommended.
-
Mr. Brighton will probably have a
stronger influence on the team’s decision than Mrs. Applebaum because he has
effectively monitored and documented his efforts to support Toni in the
classroom, as well as Toni’s responses to his attempts. It is harder to take Mrs. Applebaum seriously because she has no evidence of his inability to make progress. There is also a concern that she may be biased against Jimmy because of his family history.
-
Every professional should have something positive to say about the student. Most parents are very aware of their
child’s shortcomings; otherwise you would not all be sitting in an IEP meeting.
Parents who are in denial are less likely to reverse their opinion just because
their child’s school harps on their struggles; in fact, they are more likely to
become defensive or shut down, cutting off effective engagement.
-
Example 1: Marcus is in a third grade special
class as a student with an Emotional Disturbance. He has a
school-wide reputation of bullying other students, refusing to complete
assignments and tests, and tearing up his papers and throwing the pieces
on the floor. His teacher, Ms. Kadi is usually unable to reach his parents by
phone, and when she does, his mother usually denies that it was him or blames
other students on his behavior. At his February Triennial IEP meeting, Ms. Kadi
produces a list of Marcus’ offenses throughout the school year, and begins to
read it out loud. The list is approximately five pages long, and documents at
least 25 incidents, 15 of which Ms. Kadi was unable to discuss with the parent prior to this meeting. When asked what Marcus does well, Ms. Kadi stated, “he could be better in reading, but he's always fighting."
-
Example 2: Janet is in the fourth grade. She
has a lot of trouble in reading and math. Additionally, she is described as
closed off to her teachers. When asked to do work, Janet will suck her
teeth, roll her eyes, or outright refuse to comply. At her Initial IEP meeting,
her teacher, Ms. Lewis stated that, “Janet is very creative. Every time I look
at her notebook, I notice that she has drawn such beautiful pictures. I would
like to find a way to incorporate her love for drawing into her instruction so
that she is less resistant to schoolwork. I have been asking her to draw what
she reads, and she seems to like it.”
- Ms. Lewis is more likely to receive a positive collaborative response from Janet’s parents than Ms. Kadi will from Marcus’ mother. For one, Ms. Lewis is highlighting a strength of Janet’s while acknowledging a weakness, and is using solution-focused language. Ms. Kadi is essentially “tattling” to Marcus’ mother, and her language can be described as both accusatory and problem-focused.
-
Secondly, because Marcus has
a history of negative experiences in school, it is likely that his mother is
already aware of his struggles in this area. She is also probably at a loss
herself of what to do next. It certainly does not help her to keep rehearsing
his difficulties without offering a solution that works.
-
The IEP meeting is not an appropriate place
for a school professional to “get something off your chest”; neither is the
parent the appropriate audience. If there are many offenses on behalf of the
student or parent, one or two examples (three at most) will suffice to get the
point across. If the parent requests further detail, elaborate with minimal
emotional display. Parents who feel that school professionals are biased
against their children will likely be closed off to a productive discussion.
-
It helps to type or write out a brief
summary of the student’s abilities with equal measures of positive and negative
traits. Again, the meeting is happening because there were noted concerns about
the student’s needs and an evaluation was conducted as a result. By nature of
that process, the parent already has been, and will potentially be hearing negative things about their child. An overabundance of negativity from school staff can seem like overkill.
-
If possible, read any documents and reports
that are in the student’s file, including family and educational histories. This often helps to put things in perspective when considering the student's needs as a whole. When team members are prepared, they tend to be more confident and relaxed, which in turn can have a relaxing effect on the parent.
3. Know Yourself – Body Language vs. Verbal
Language
-
Educators are experts in their fields.
Teachers are the experts in the classroom, School Psychologists are experts in
the evaluation process and special education law, Speech providers are experts
in language and communication, and PARENTS ARE EXPERTS IN RAISING THEIR OWN
CHILDREN.
-
Even if an educator feels that he or she is
dealing with the most uneducated, uninterested, uninvolved parent they have
ever met, it is NOT that educator’s job to argue, lecture, or talk “down” to that
parent, especially if there is no knowledge of context to why that parent
presents that way. It’s also not the educator’s business. It is our job to be
objective and professional no matter what.
-
Check your bias – Does the parent look the
way you think a parent should look? Do they use discipline measures you don’t
feel are appropriate? Do they speak in broken English, and do you think that
limits their understanding of their child’s needs? Why do you feel this way? Is
your perception of them inhibiting your ability to treat them fairly?
-
Everyone has implicit biases toward people
who do not look like them or share their life experiences. “Implicit” means
that we don’t always know they are there until they manifest. Sometimes it
takes someone else explicitly pointing it out. Relationship is key to understanding
others, but there is not always time or opportunity to develop one. So the best
rule of thumb is to treat people the way you would want to be treated if you
were on the other side of the table.
-
If a parent does not speak English (or speaks
in broken English), they should be treated no differently from a parent that
speaks fluent English. I don’t usually have a hard time maintaining my
professional demeanor (friendly, calm, and neutral), but the one thing that tests me EVERY
time is when professionals treat parents as if they do not know their own
children or cannot tell when others are talking about them. Here are some
things to keep in mind when interacting with a non-English speaking parent
(person) in any situation.
-
Look at them when you’re talking to
them – Even if a translator is present, you are speaking to the PARENT. The
translator is equivalent to subtitles when watching television. You read the
subtitles to understand what is happening, but you are watching the SHOW. The parent and IEP team members are the show. Govern yourself accordingly.
-
Avoid speaking to the translator or
other English-speaking co-professionals using phrases such as, “Ask her… tell
him… does she?” - Remember, we learn language receptively first, and then
expressively. Even if they are not fluent in English, they may have a much
better understanding listening to someone else talk. Which means parents may
realize that you are talking about them in front of their face instead of
addressing them directly. It. Is. Rude.
-
Keep the conversation inclusive – Do
not speak over the parent’s head to the other English-speaking team members
without allowing for translation. You may need to take some time to simplify
your statements so that the conversation can progress without overwhelming the
parent or excessively prolonging the meeting time.
-
Always be respectful – Check your body
language, including your facial expression, body posture, and attention. There
should only be one conversation going at one time. If the translator is
interpreting, it is not an opportunity to have a side conversation. The parent
can still hear and see you. Recognition of rude behavior transcends all spoken language.
-
Check your presentation – What does your
facial expression look like at this moment? Are you aware that you roll your
eyes and purse your lips briefly when you do not agree with something? Do you
interrupt others when they are speaking? How do others react to you in
different settings? Does it seem like some people are friendly at first and
then become confrontational, even though you didn’t say anything offensive (you
don’t think)? Is there a possibility that you have done something to illicit
that response? Not that you have to walk on eggshells, but you should be conscious of how you come off to people, especially when talking to parents about their children.
-
Many people, even professionals, do not
realize that their feelings are openly displayed whether or not they verbally
express them. When entering an IEP meeting, remember that parents are already
feeling vulnerable and sensitive about their child (and themselves as parents).
They will not ask for it, but they need some reassurance that, even if
something is wrong now, their children will eventually be okay. If you’re not
feeling optimistic in the moment, that’s okay. But don’t let it show on your
face. Keep it out of your tone. And don’t fight so hard to be heard. Say your
piece and let someone else maintain rapport with the parent. They have a lot to
process, and they are the ones (along with their children) who will need to
adjust to a new normal. We should always be sensitive to that.
Above all, remember the
golden rules to IEP etiquette:
-
Be prepared.
-
Be solution-focused.
- Be kind.
That's all for now! Dr. Jali out!
