Report Inappropriate Comments

The noton that, 'we give it to you, and then we take it away. We give you the support you need, and take it away when you no longer need it. Eventually, you will be going out into the world as an adult, and they’re not the same [?]. You’re not going to go to a separate market, church or anything else. The world is not separate,' is correct, though there could be many ways to word it. The goal is to exit children from specialized instruction the moment it begins, even if they qualify under Hearing Impaird or Visually Impaired. Children will always have these disibilities, it's true, but they may not always require specialized instruction "because of" their disibility. Once a child can read and write using braille and data supports that specialized instruction is no longer required, it is required that Ms Simpson exit the students from services. This is a requirement of IDEA. Now, if this student continues to require accommodations due to their disibility, they can receive them, in school and beyond the age of 21 (say the work place) with a 504 plan through the OCR.

"'The whole idea is for us to provide you with the support so you can lose the services", should not be addressed out of context. A student who's learning is significantly impacted due to a diagnosis of ADHD, may not always be in need of say, support in written expression and organizational skills, but that student, once diagnosed, will always carry the diagnosis. Again, Ms Simpson's responsibility, through and because of, IDEA, is to help the student to, "lose the services". Having a disibility or a diagnosis, is not a ticket to an IEP for life. Some students will require specialized instruction until the age of 21, but it really is Ms Simpson's responsibility to exit students as soon as individualized data supports it. In doing so, she is preserving special education for those who really need it.