Review: The Complete IEP Guide: How to Advocate for Your Special Ed Child

NOLO offers a complete legal resource, including the complete text of the Individuals with Disabilties Act of 2004 for parents and professionals. Designed for parents, it walks them through the steps they need to take to represent the best interests of their child at an IEP meeting, describes the law and the process by which parents can represent the best interests of their child. In many ways a realistic guide, it does tend to use examples of parents seeking services that exceed what a hearing officer would consider a "Free and Appopropriate Public Education."

Author and attorney Lawrence M. Siegel lays out a complete outline of the rights of families and children diagnosed for special education. He begins by describing special education, the basis for special education law ( FAPE, LRE, Evaluation, Diagnosis, etc.) He goes on to recommend seeking independent evaluations, reviewing evaluations and documents and other preliminary preparations to be sure that a parent is prepared. He recommends creating a "Blue Print" that will help a parent lay out what they see as their child's needs and the services that will best help that child meet their needs.

An educator should hope that a parent does not read this before they start the process for an IEP. If a parent were to follow it closely, they would not only be a capable advocate for their child's needs, they would probably bowl the LEA (Local Education Authority) over at a meeting and probably never need to hire a lawyer.

No worry, though (at least for the parents.)They will be well prepared to move on to the next step, mediation, if the district doesn't meet their needs. He also lays out the steps needed to go to Due Process, if it is only to resolve some of the issues in the IEP with which the parent has issues.

Special Educators need to pay close attention to the timetable and the rights of the special education children. Certainly this book will help a teacher understand their responsibilities as laid out by the law and the requirements of the IEP.

Siegal does fail, though, in pointing out the failure to follow the letter of the law could mean serious consequences for the school district. Hearing officers and judges give precedence to the presumed superior knowledge of the educational organization if they have followed the timelines and strict requirements of the law, and will decide in most cases for the district. If they have been sloppy or haphazard, it is likely that the hearing officer or judge will trust the parent and/or their lawyers to represent the best interests educationally of the child rather than the "experts."

Siegal also fails parents when he uses examples of parents requesting 3 or 4 half hour sessions a week with a speech pathologist. He does correctly point out that a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) does not guarantee the best education, just an appropriate education. He leaves parent readers with the notion that with proper preparation, they will get the program or the services they request, without forewarning them that there may well be may be an appropriate alternative available in their school district to the program they believe their child needs (say Wilson Reading, whereas the district may use an alternate direct instruction program for reading such as Reading Mastery, which may be equally effective for a disabled reader.)

This is a concise and straightforward guide that lays out the process through the IEP meeting and due process. Although designed for parents, it does clearly remind the teacher of the steps that need to be followed. In large districts, immediate supervisors may just be other special education teachers, sometimes not as well versed in law as a recent graduate, and their understanding of practice may be at odds with the law. In small districts, a building principal may be the LEA (Local Educational Authority) and may not know special education law. Not only a resource, this will provide a way to show an administrator "the right way" without seeming argumentative.