Home ::
TCTA was successful in giving input during the stakeholder meetings that was reflected in the proposed and final rules, including asking for the rules to specify which regular education teacher should be a part of the ARD committee. This input was a result of TCTA hearing from TCTA members who were being asked to serve on ARD committees when they had absolutely no knowledge of the child or very little likelihood that they would be teaching the child. In support of TCTA’s request, TCTA cited the official comments accompanying the federal regulations, which stated that "The regular education teacher who serves as a member of a child's IEP Team should be a teacher who is, or may be, responsible for implementing a portion of the IEP so that the teacher can participate in discussions about how best to instruct the child."
Despite the fact that TEA apparently received input from nine special education directors, seven superintendents, two attorneys, one education specialist, one assistant director, and two educational diagnosticians that this language should not be added, TEA chose to maintain TCTA’s recommended language in the final rule. Consequently, the final TEA rule now addresses this issue, stating that “The regular education teacher who serves as a member of a student's ARD committee should be a regular education teacher who is responsible for implementing a portion of the student's IEP.”
TCTA also pushed hard to get language included in the rules that would have required teachers who were excused from ARD committee meetings to be notified of such, to protect against potential abuses of the new federal excusal provisions, such as teachers who are likely to disagree with the administration’s decisions being systematically “excused” from attending ARD committee meetings. Federal law and regulations provide that when an IEP Team (ARD committee) member’s area is not being modified or discussed, the member is not required to attend the ARD committee if the parent and school district agree in writing that the member’s attendance is not necessary.
TCTA gave input that there may certainly be instances when a teacher does not need to attend the ARD committee meetings, but that we were also concerned about the use of this new provision to exclude teachers who may have a differing opinion from the administration regarding the education of the student. TCTA suggested requiring written notice to the “excused” member that attendance at the meeting has been determined not to be necessary.
TCTA additionally suggested that language be added to the rule that mirrors language included in the federal comments accompanying the applicable federal regulations as follows: "An LEA (school district) may not routinely or unilaterally excuse IEP Team members from attending IEP Team meetings, as parent agreement or consent is required in each instance. An LEA that routinely excuses IEP Team members from attending IEP Team meetings would not be in compliance with the requirements of the Act, and, therefore, would be subject to the State’s monitoring and enforcement provisions." However, TEA chose not to include these protections for teachers in its final rules.
Finally, TCTA gave input regarding the definition of a child with a learning disability, stating that TEA rules should mirror federal law in prohibiting a child from being determined to have a learning disability if the predominant factor in the child’s underachievement is the lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math. The proposed TEA rules did not require that a lack of appropriate instruction be the predominant factor, but rather just a factor, in the child’s underachievement. TCTA was concerned that without requiring lack of appropriate instruction to be the predominant factor in the child’s underachievement, TEA rules would effectively result in fewer children being able to receive special education services for a learning disability than federal law requires. Unfortunately, TEA chose not to change the rule to mirror federal law.
For more information about the new TEA special education rules, visit the website.
Comments submitted: 06/20/07
