Parent sues over child's placement in English, math classes

A parent filed an appeal regarding the district's determination of the proper educational setting for a student with dyslexia. 

The classroom accommodations for the student were described as "unique" within the school district for their magnitude. With those accommodations, the student earned excellent grades and had a spotless disciplinary record. 

When the student entered ninth grade, the district proposed removing him from the general classroom environment and placing him in a separate classroom for English and math. The proposal was based on a finding that his grades overstated his performance and that his substantially more limited academic progress necessitated the change. 

The parent filed a due process complaint, after which the commissioner of education ruled that the school district's proposal was appropriate for math but not for English. The parents filed an appeal to district court, which agreed with the school district and found a separate classroom appropriate for both subjects. The parents then appealed that decision to the court of appeals.

On appeal, the school district argued that, even with the numerous accommodations provided to the student, objective data and teacher testimony demonstrated that the student was "progressively falling further and further behind." The district argued that the decision to place the student in a separate classroom for both math and English was reasonable. 

The appeals court determined that for both classes: 

1. the student could not "grasp the essential elements" of the regular education; 
2. the social benefit of the student staying in general education was unclear; and 
3. the student's needs "had a detrimental impact" on his fellow special education students.

In conducting its review, the court of appeals noted that the law requires that when education in a regular classroom cannot meet the child's unique needs, the presumption in favor of mainstreaming is overcome and the school need not place the child in regular education. 

In this case, the evidence supported a finding that, even with accommodations, the student could not "grasp the essential elements of the regular education curriculum" in both math and English. 

Despite making passing grades, the student did not show signs of the level of comprehension that was appropriate for him. The school district determined that the student required significant resources to ensure comprehension, namely, a slower pace, a smaller classroom setting, and increased one-on-one instruction. 

Considering that the student would be mainstreamed in all other subjects, and that providing increased support to the student in the general education classroom would reduce the support available to other special education students, the school districts determination that placement in a separate classroom was appropriate was lawful.

The court of appeals upheld the determination that the student should be placed in a separate classroom for both math and English.