Re: Off-topic: Special needs services - federal law

["ElsaHaas" <ElsaHaas@si.rr.com>]

No, Art, you are wrong (though the "Regents item" is poorly written and I
can see why you might have concluded what you did). 

In NYS, a child cannot be homeschooled and be enrolled at a public school at
the same time. A child is either enrolled in a public school; enrolled in a
private school (technically, a "non-public school", since that would also
include what have historically been called "parochial schools"); or is
homeschooled (which means the parents are supposed to file official
homeschool paperwork in compliance with the NYS Regulations on Home
Instruction, Part 100.10 of the Regulations of the Commissioner). Part-time
attendance at a public school, or "dual enrollment", is not permitted in NYS
(though it is permitted in some other states). 

There is also an entirely different possibility open only to kids who are
unable to attend public school due to long-term severe emotional, orthopedic
or medical reasons. Only if that is the case, the child can receive home
tutoring by a Department of Education employee - I think it's five hours a
week or so. But that is more correctly referred to as "home-bound
instruction" - it is not the kind of homeschooling I'm talking about, which
is chosen voluntarily by the parents of a child who is physically and
mentally capable of attending school (whether as a regular student or as a
special ed student). 

This is the paragraph from the "item" that probably caused Art's
misunderstanding (it's the second sentence that's poorly written - it would
be clearer if it read "to ensure that, if the student is at some point
enrolled in the public schools, FAPE is provided"): 

"The Department will be advising the field that the provision of IEP
services by a public school district to students with disabilities who are
home schooled students educated pursuant to section 100.10 of the
Regulations of the Commissioner of Education is not authorized under IDEA or
NYS law. This communication will recommend that, for home schooled students
currently receiving special education services from the public school
district, the Committee on Special Education reconvene to determine if any
amendments to the IEP are needed to ensure that FAPE is provided upon
enrollment of the student in the public schools.  Districts will be also
advised to notify the parents of the need to review and revise, as
appropriate, the child's individualized home instruction plan (IHIP) to
address their child's special education needs.  The IHIP would then be
reviewed and approved by the school superintendent.  As home instruction is,
by its very nature, individualized and flexible, parents may provide for the
special education needs of their children in different ways than those
contained in the IEP."

What the "Regent's item" is saying (as I've said, I can see how it could
have been expressed more clearly) is that now that homeschooled kids in NYS
will be ineligible for special ed services paid for with federal/state
funds, the parents can always change their minds about the whole thing and
choose FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education) instead - that is, send the
kid to public school - and that the Committee on Special Education had
better be ready for that possibility. And it's saying that if the parents
want to be obstinate about it and continue to homeschool despite the change
in policy, they can go ahead and find (and pay for) their own special
services.

We worry about the possibility that some families that had been able to
address their child's special needs through homeschooling as long as they
were getting the special services will now be told that their revised IHIPs
are "deficient" because they don't have the money to continue the therapy on
their own. 

In effect, rich people who can pay for therapy themselves will have the
right to homeschool, while poor (or perhaps middle-class) parents may have
that right taken away. (I'm talking about kids who already have an IEP -
parents can refuse to have their child evaluated in the first place, and I
suppose that's what many will do after this change in policy.) 

Some of these therapies are very expensive. (But, again, the provision of
special services to a homeschooling family is often going to be cheaper than
paying for a special private school costing something like $35,000 a year,
which is what NYS ends up doing when it gets sued by the parents and loses.)

The crux of all this is that the 2004 version of IDEA seems to be creating
an odd situation in which homeschooling parents will be able to get special
services if they happen to live in a state in which the laws or regulations
treat homeschooling as "private school", while they will be unable to get
the same services if they happen to live in a state (like NYS) in which
homeschooling and private schools are two separate legal categories. And
that is just plain silly and needs to be fixed. But, as I said, there will
probably be a gap in services until it is fixed.

I don't understand Art's last sentence.  
           
Elsa Haas (PAHSI)

-----Original Message-----
From: arn-l-owner@interversity.org [mailto:arn-l-owner@interversity.org] On
Behalf Of aburke5054@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 4:30 PM
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Subject: Re: [arn-l] Off-topic: Special needs services - federal law

The "memo," or ""Regent's item," says explicitly that IDEA grants free 
and appropriate public education to eligible home schooled children who 
are enrolled at a public school.  A child can be both home schooled and 
enrolled in a public school.  That can be worked out.  This seems fair 
and nondiscriminatory to me, although I can see how people dead set 
against the public schools might not think that way.  Still, there is 
an irony in that, apparently, if a state defines home schooled students 
to be equal to students in public or private schools, a home schooled 
child could be served in his or her home, but I don't see that public 
education would necessarily be required to serve the child in his or 
her home.

Art

-----Original Message-----
From: ElsaHaas <ElsaHaas@si.rr.com>
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 9:00 am
Subject: Re: [arn-l] Off-topic: Special needs services - federal law

This is the link to an official document cooked up by the NYSED that 
seems
(though I have not read it all yet) to indicate that this is more than
hysteria, but a real impending problem that will not be resolved by a 
simple
"query" (this is what I had referred to as a "memo", but it's now being
referred to by a NYSED staffer as a "Regents item"):



http://www.regents.nysed.gov/2008Meetings/January2008/0108vesidd3.htm  


[...]
Elsa Haas (PAHSI)