|
|
|
|
|
|
CADRE will convene Showcasing Exemplary Practices: The Fifth National Symposium on Dispute Resolution in Special Education, on October 26-28th, 2011 in beautiful Eugene, Oregon. Symposium invitees include State dispute resolution coordinators, directors of special education, dispute resolution practitioners, parent advocates, attorneys, educators, service providers, parents and others.
|
|
This case highlights family and educator conflict about special education placement using the case of Jerry, a student with behavior disorders. Aspiring administrators are invited to consider Jerry’s needs, the desires of his family, the concerns of local and alternative school faculty, the safety of students and staff, and the provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. They are then asked to determine a suitable course of action and provide a rationale.(Abstract from authors)
|
"Keys To Access" Award and Past Recipients In order to further CADRE’s objective of encouraging the broadest possible access to the full range of conflict resolution options, and, to honor individuals and organizations that build schools and communities that are respectful of cultural, linguistic and class differences, we are pleased to present the "Keys to Access" Award.
|
|
|
 CADRE is please to be presenting The National Symposium on IEP FAcilitation in our beautiful home-town of Eugene, Oregon.
|
|
|
2000 "Keys to Access" Award Presented The 2000 "Keys To Access" Award
was presented on December 1, 2000 at CADRE's National
Symposium on Dispute Resolution in Special Education in Washington,
D.C. The award was presented to Dick Lash and Myrta Cuadra in recognition
of their outstanding contribution to special education. The award
was presented by CADRE Mediation Specialist Anita Engiles and CADRE
Director Marshall Peter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 IDEA Statute & Regulations were published on August 14, 2006. News, information and resources on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA '04) including a copy of the regulations available for download.
|
2005 "Keys To Access" Award Professor Floyd D. Weatherspoon CADRE is pleased to announce Floyd D. Weatherspoon, Professor of Law at Capital University Law School as the recipient of the 2005 Keys to Access Award. Prof. Weatherspoon’s inspirational leadership has drawn national attention to the critical need to increase the presence of minority professionals at all levels and in all areas of alternative dispute resolution. The Award will be presented at CADRE’s National Symposium on IEP Facilitation.
|
2006 "Keys To Access" Award Presented to the Honorable Robert M. Bell CADRE is pleased to announce that the Honorable Robert M. Bell, Chief Judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals and a civil rights hero, received the "Keys to Access" Award at On the Road to Agreement ~ IDEA '04 & More: The Fourth National Symposium on Dispute Resolution in Special Education.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Program Agenda
|
|
In the Michigan Revised Administrative Rules for Special Education (1987) there are two methods listed for solving disputes in special education. They are: the Due Process Hearing and Mediation. Due Process Hearings are legalistic and adversarial while Mediations are based on negotiation and reconciliation. The researcher compared the perceptions of the disputants within each process. Also compared are the perceptions of similar disputant roles between processes. The purpose was: (1) to obtain demographic data on the parents and students who were disputants and (2) to compare the processes, themselves.
The populations of hearings and Mediations from 7-1-88 to 12-31-89 were sampled. Parents, directly involved school administrators, hearing officers and mediators were interviewed by telephone with the same series of question with appropriate context modifications requiring them to recall particulars about their perceptions of their Mediation(s) or Due Process Hearing(s).
The use of both processes seemed limited to parents making $40,000 or more per year and those with at least some college education. Students about whom Mediations occur were younger than those about whom hearings are held. Female students were more often represented in Mediations despite the fact that two thirds of the population in special education is male. Gender ratios in hearings approximated state wide averages.
When it came to special education dispute resolution, only the schools come away satisfied with the results or process. Parents in general, are not happy with either the process or results of Mediation or Due Process Hearings. This is not surprising since parents lose 86% of Due Process Hearings and they usually compromise during Mediation. However, when one examines the two dispute resolution alternatives together, an important image emerges. On nearly any measure one chooses (cost, cooperation, satisfaction, fairness, settlement and reoccurrence of conflict) parents participating in Mediations are significantly more positive about the process than those participating in hearings. Mediation is less costly, less legalistic, fosters more cooperation, reoccurs less frequently and results in greater satisfaction on the part of parents and schools than Due Process Hearings.
|
|
This study explored the differences between parents who had initiated hearings and complaints and their perceptions of the processes. A document review, structured telephone interview, and focus group meetings were used to gather data. The subjects were 29 parents who had initiated complains and 31 parents who had initiated hearings. The subjects were randomly selected from the population of all parents who had initiated hearings or complaints with the Maine Department of Education during 1996. Findings of the study reveal that families with higher annual household income tend to use the hearing process, to withdraw or mediate their disputes and to be represented by counsel. No differences were found on parent satisfaction, marital status, or the ability of parents to participate in school activities. Parents reported a high level of anger, frustration, and confusion regarding both processes. Parent and school relationships, poor communication, and compliance issues were identified as causes for the initiation of a complaint or hearing. The hearing group cited expense, the legalistic nature of hearings and stress as major problems while the complaint group cited lack of accountability and enforcement as major problems. Both groups recommended increased parent training and support and improved monitoring and enforcement by the Maine Department of Education. The results of this study support the conclusion that the hearing process is primarily available to those families with higher incomes and that both the hearing and the complaint processes tend to be associated with poor parent-school relationships. Additional research is needed to identify methods to improve parent and school relationships after the initiation of due process and to ensure that all parents have access to alternatives for the resolution of parent and school conflict.
|
|
Section II of this Comment reviews the statutory and common-law roots of IDEA and summarizes the resultant legislation. Section III of this Comment addresses specific controversial policies of the Act. Specifically, Section III focuses on the inconsistencies within the mandates of: free education; appropriate education; placement in the least restrictive environment; individualized education plan; and due process safeguards. Section IV recommends strategies for legislative, judicial, and administrative intervention to accelerate compliance with IDEA and to achieve the positive outcomes the 94th Congress envisioned.
|
A Just Alternative or Just an Alternative? Mediation and the Americans with Disabilities Act Certainly litigation in federal court is a critical component to implementing this vital civil rights statute, and mediation is not appropriate for every kind of disability employment rights case. However, mediation is not second-class justice either, and in many instances, with procedural safeguards to ensure fairness, mediation can provide better justice than a lawsuit.
|
|
A study examined the influence of professional etiquette, procedural factors, demographic factors, and child eligibility code factors on parent satisfaction with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). Surveys and interviews were conducted with 207 parents in the Southwest border region whose children had been evaluated for special education services and who had attended an IEP meeting. Results indicate that each of the four independent variables influenced satisfaction with IEP meetings. Direct positive relationships existed when professional etiquette and procedural factors were examined as sole indicators of satisfaction. Three features of parent and child demographics demonstrated inverse relationships to satisfaction. Those were family income, parent education, and male participant attending with spouse/partner. With regard to student eligibility codes, less satisfaction was reported for meetings held for children with physical or health impairments. When viewed as part of an interaction, all four independent variables revealed significance. Either in first-level or second-level interactions, demographic features, annual family income, and parent education showed interaction with etiquette and procedural factors. Ethnicity had no effect on satisfaction scores. The eligibility code of physical or health impairments continued to be significant when combined with other independent variables. Recommendations include training professionals and parents regarding special education and IEPs; simplifying educational jargon; following through with IEP provisions; having appropriate personnel present at IEP meetings; and ensuring the environment is conducive to decision making. (ERIC)
|
|
Addresses the successes and challenges associated with mediation in special education disputes in Missouri. Reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in June 1997 and National Association of State Disorders of Special Education's studies on mediation
|
|
Recognizes the benefits of mediation for easing special education conflicts, but addresses the inconsistencies and ambiguities created by the 1997 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Recommends that state and local education agencies use mediators certified in sophisticated mediation techniques, schooled in special-education law, and employed by independent organizations. (ERIC)
|
 [Abstract}
Two prospective longitudinal studies of nationally representative samples of students with disabilities—the Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study and the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2—are used to provide a broad look at the participation of parents of 11- through 19-year-old students with disabilities in Individualized Education Plan/transition planning meetings and their satisfaction with their involvement in them. Students’ attendance and the roles played in their transition planning meetings are also examined. Logistic regression analyses identify disability characteristics; demographics; aspects of parents’ involvement, expectations, and perceptions; experiences in students’ educational histories; and features of their instructional programs that help explain variations in parent and student participation, parent satisfaction, and student roles.
[Excerpt from conclusion]
Federal legislation intends for parents to be equal partners with school staff in educational planning for their children and, for students ages 14 or older (at the time data were collected, now ages 16 or older), to participate in transition planning and for their goals and preferences to drive that process and the resulting transition goals and activities. The findings reported here indicate that the federal intention is not being equally realized for students served under IDEA and their families. For example, rates of IEP/transition planning meeting participation were higher for parents of students with some kinds of disabilities than others, with some levels of income than others, and from some racial/ethnic backgrounds than others. Parents of students who had demonstrated challenging behavior at school or who had poor social skills also found participating in IEP/transition planning meetings to be less than satisfactory.
|
|
The Pre-Elementary Education Longitudinal Study (PEELS) examines the preschool and early elementary school experiences of a nationally representative sample of 3,104 children ages 3–5 with disabilities from 2004 through 2009. This paper describes the special education and related services received by a subsample of 186 preschoolers with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in 2003–2004 and parental satisfaction with those services. Past research and patterns of litigation suggest that parents of children with ASD are not wholly satisfied with the special education and related services their children receive. In the current study, the authors found many similarities between children with ASD and children with other disabilities in the type of services received under IDEA and in parent satisfaction with these services. Still, some significant differences emerged in the number of services received, the amount of time children with ASD spent in special education settings, and parent satisfaction with the amount of time children spent with typically developing peers. Implications about the importance of parent satisfaction and social validity measures are discussed. (Abstract from author)
|
|
The number of due process hearings between parents of children with disabilities and school districts is growing nationwide. This litigation costs millions of dollars and destroys the relationships between the home and school envisioned during the creation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This article provides a discussion of the status of our nation with regard to conflict between families and school districts. Current dispute resolution procedures, such as due process, formal complaints, and mediation, are all discussed as they relate to this growing national problem. Information regarding resolution meetings and alternative dispute resolution strategies are also discussed, as well as recommended structures for practicing appropriate dispute resolution in special education. (Abstract from author)
|
|
|
|
This article outlines a research agenda that focuses on the use of ADR for civil money disputes that have already reached the filing stage. The author asks: What is actually going on in court-related ADR programs?, What is the effect on litigation and court costs?, Why is there a perception that ADR saves time and money?, and What processes are preferred by parties and lawyers?, and why?
|
|
[abstract]
+ This article maps out the similarities and differences among the various routes to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 dispute resolution, including those not widely and well known to special education leaders.
+ For IDEA-eligible students, the alternative avenues consist of not only the impartial hearing procedures and the state education agency’s complaint investigation/resolution process but also the routes of legal recourse under Section 504.
+ For students eligible under Section 504 alone, the alternative avenues amount to not only the complaint investigation/resolution process of the Office for Civil Rights but also the required grievance and impartial hearing procedures, which are subject to considerable confusion and—in light of the IDEA’s intersecting exhaustion requirement—complexity.
+ The various parts of this roadmap range from basic points for the new special education leader to more
nuanced or advanced points for the experienced special education leader, with ample documentation of the specific legal sources.
|
|
|
|
Whereas the IDEA intended a parent-school partnership, it is not at all unusual or unexpected that parents become the adversary of the school district, sometimes to the point of "irreconcilable differences" and irrationally undermining the proposed program or services for their child. The difficulty with such a situation, as illustrated by the focal Seventh Circuit case, is that the parents' misconduct and the child's proposed IEP become intertwined. Using the child's right to a FAPE as the controlling consideration is an understandable, although not agreeable, approach. Characterizations by the dissent and others that the Seventh Circuit's decision creates an "automatic veto" for parents constitute hyperbole. First, the ruling has its own limits. Second, the IDEA and related threads in the legal net for students with disabilities limit parental authority and provide alternate disincentives for undue parental "adversariness." Although adjusting the system so that more resources and emphasis are directed to education rather than legalization is desirable, the present system appropriately puts the priority on providing the child with a FAPE, with separate and secondary punishment for parental misconduct.
|
|
The purpose of this study was to analyze the increase in special-education complaints that may result in litigation and their cost to districts. The study included the analysis of data from a survey disseminated to all superintendents in Regions 1 and 2 in Texas, and an analysis of data from special-education hearing dockets for hearings held from January 1998 through October 1999. Responses were used to determine perceptions of district personnel with regards to special-education complaints. Descriptive data from the 1998 and 1999 Texas Educational Agency due-process hearing dockets were also used. Study conclusions include: (1) The term "free appropriate public education" is difficult to define but required by law for all students with an identified handicap; (2) a large number of complaints focus on parental disagreements with student placement and the requirement of least-restrictive environment, as well as on components of the individual education plan; (3) resolution at the district level is more cost effective than going to hearing; (4) a cooperative environment between the district and the parent increases the likelihood that a dispute will be resolved without the filing of an official complaint; and (5) the best defense for any district is to comply with federal and state procedural requirements at all times. (ERIC)
|
A Style Index for Mediators The Mediator Classification Index (MCI) is designed to assist in understanding the approach or style a mediator tends to use during the mediation process. The MCI is a valuable tool which you may ask prospective mediators to complete as part of the mediator selection process. This is also a valuable tool for mediator self-examination.
|
A Tale of Two Conversations These two videos, which were developed by the Office for Dispute Resolution in Pennsylvania, feature Dixie Trinen and Suzanne McDougall.
|
A Tale of Two Conversations These two videos, which were developed by the Office for Dispute Resolution in Pennsylvania, feature Dixie Trinen and Suzanne McDougall.
|
A Tale of Two Conversations Study Guide This Study Guide uses "A Tale of Two Conversations," as a learning tool, offering keys for more effective communication as well as problem solving skills and approaches. It provides opportunities to reflect on how you communicate now and what you could do differently. The Study Guide is available for parents, educators and trainers.
|
A Tale of Two Conversations Study Guide (No Captioning) This Study Guide uses "A Tale of Two Conversations," as a learning tool, offering keys for more effective communication as well as problem solving skills and approaches. It provides opportunities to reflect on how you communicate now and what you could do differently. The Study Guide is available for parents, educators and trainers.
|
|
Abstract: "Conflict between parents of children with disabilities and school districts has become a national topic of concern. Parents and districts are continuing to rely on due process hearings to resolve conflict. This practice is emotionally and financially exhausting, and leaves no room for collaboration. Because the relationship between parents and school members is so important to a child’s education, this dilemma is worrisome.
Using a multiple case study method, this study explored two school districts that implemented a systems change to institute a lower level of parent-school conflict that reduced reliance on hearings or mediation. Interviews, observations and document analysis findings indicated leadership at both districts contributed to the changes and ultimately the institutionalization of a proactive system. Nine categories were identified as indicators of system practices that promote positive parent-school relations. These include 1) Communication, 2) Trust, 3) Professional development and Parent education, 4) Support, 5) Partnership, 6) Resource creativity, 7) Educational services, 8) Legal practices, and 9) Alternative dispute resolution.
This study illustrates the importance of effective leadership and proactive systems practices. Findings indicate conflict between parents and school districts can be resolved without having to go to exhaustive litigation battles. Additionally, this study shows the potential for moving a district from a litigious climate to one that fosters the parent-school partnership. Relevant literature on special education law, parent-school relations, conflict prevention, alternative dispute resolution, and leadership will be presented and discussed."
Conclusion: "This study indicates there is hope for school districts to improve their relations with parents, decrease their hearing rates, and improve their overall system. Given the important role leadership played in these two districts, it appears administrators should be coached and trained in these effective parent-school practices. This study also identified nine categorical system indicators of positive parent-school relations. These practices could assist leaders with restructuring their systems. Findings support the notion that one specific action or change may not be enough to improve parent-school relations. Rather, there is clearly a need for a larger multi-element systems change.
These two school districts illustrate a dramatic “before and after” picture. Parents who once felt the only way to resolve an issue was through a due process hearing are now partners with the district. These parents continue to contribute to the district’s success. There is no longer an image of the parents and district members taking opposite sides. Such stories indicate hope for the many other districts that face contention with angry parents and strained staff. Although due process procedures are available as rights under IDEA, it is clear that there are ways to resolve disputes without having to go through such an exhaustive process. The ultimate goal in avoiding these hearings is to maintain the parent-school relationship. This study shows that districts can structure their systems in a way that fosters the parent-school partnership so that in the end everyone is satisfied, especially the child." (pp.252-253)
|
About CADRE All About CADRE and our Partner Organizations.
|
About PACER PACER Center is a nonprofit, tax exempt Minnesota statewide organization begun in 1977. PACER's mission is to improve and expand opportunities that enhance
the quality of life for children and young adults with all disabilities - physical, mental, emotional, learning - and their families.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certain aspects of special education law concerning parental legal rights are not clear... "Specifically, there has been uncertainty whether non-lawyer parents have the right in court proceedings to challenge pro se the suitability of their child's special education services. The ambiguities of this topic are highlighted by the immense variability in circuit courts decisions throughout the country. Recently, the Supreme Court resolved this unsettled area of law in Winkelman v. Parma City School District" (p.130).
The article goes on to note that with only one exception, federal courts have "held that non-lawyer parents pursuing solely substantive claims were not allowed to represent their children without the assistance of an attorney, based on a their legislative interpretation of IDEA" (p.134). For illustration, note the Third Circuit's opinion "that appearing pro se is explicitly provided for in IDEA, but only when a party is pursuing their own rights. Furthermore, the [court] commented that non-lawyer parents are not allowed to represent their children pro se if the rights asserted are the child's alone" (p.135).
The only federal court that did allow pro se parental representation for substantive violations of IDEA was the First Circuit" which concluded "'that parents are parties aggrived within the meaning of IDEA, and thus may sue pro se'" (p.137).
The Winklemans were parents of a six-year-old child with autism named Jacob, a student of the Parma City School District. They opposed the 2003-2004 IEP because "it failed to provide him with enough music and speech therapy and one-on-one interaction" (p.138). They placed Jacob in a private school at their own expense and pursued administrative review of the IEP. After the hearing officer and state-level review officer rejected their challenge, they sought review in federal district court; that court, too, found that Jacob had been provided with a free appropriate public education as required by IDEA. The Winklemans appealed pro se to the Sixth Circuit, which dismissed the case because they had not retained a licensed attorney to represent their son. (p.138)
"The Supreme Court ruling in Winkelman v. Parma City School District will help promote social justice in American's schools by empowering parents of students with disabilities with substantive rights to appear pro se in federal court to challenge the appropriateness of their child's IEP." (p.147)
|
|
As a result of recent federal legislation, states are required to provide mediation as a dispute resolution option to parents and school districts involved in special education disputes. Although states are mandated to provide mediation services, the law gives little guidance as to how states should select a mediation model, select mediators, or measure mediator performance and program success. Many states rely on participant satisfaction surveys and statistics on the number of agreements reached to demonstrate program effectiveness and quality. This paper examines what such survey data measures and whether it is a reliable indicator of the procedural and substantive fairness of the mediation process. Specifically, this article first examines the historical context of Pennsylvania's efforts to create the Pennsylvania Special Education Mediation Service. Next, the article looks at two sources of program data: one quantitative and the other qualitative. The former consists of approximately two thousand participant post-mediation questionnaires collected over three years, from 1997-2000. Participants answered questions about mediator performance, fairness of the process, for of PaSEMS office, and suitability of surroundings. Parties indicated almost unanimous satisfaction with process and mediator. 82% indicated they were satisfied or very satisfied w/ the results. Comments on questionnaires were also evaluated, most of which reflected procedural concerns. The latter source consists of the performance evaluations of eight special education mediators. Mediators scored best on managing the startup, expressing empathy nonverbally, and managing personalities. Mediators scored least well on moving the parties toward an improved relationship. Although more data is needed, Pennsylvania's experience suggests the need to examine the relationships that exist between mediation agencies and the institutions in which they are administratively housed, the development and rigorous implementation of relevant mediator evaluation instruments, stricter standards for mediator training, and a way of relating measures of program quality to stakeholder goals and program design.
|
ADA Mediation Guidelines: An Ongoing Endeavor ADA Guidelines were issued in February 2000. As the Work Group intended, a collaborative process has continued in the intervening years. This article highlights some of the resulting developments.
|
ADA Mediation Standards The ADA Mediation Guidelines for mediation providers are the product of a national Work Group convened to develop mediation practice Guidelines unique to conflicts arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
|
|
|
ADR Options There is a spectrum of dispute resolution processes, ranging from informal discussion to formal adjudication. The concept behind the development of alternative dispute resolution, or "ADR," is that the traditional adjudicatory model of dispute resolution is not always the best approach. Rather, the concept has developed that "the forum should fit the fuss," and not vice versa.
|
|
Article analyzes success of mediation, arbitration, summary jury trials in general. Most studies cited did not relate to special ed mediation but might be useful to inform methodology of future studies. Article reports some data on special ed mediations, finding higher correlation with parental satisfaction than in traditional d.p. hearing. Study did not find greater satisfaction with outcome than with litigation, no higher approval rating from school personnel, no lowered cost. The study cited concluded that mediation was not achieving its potential for resolving disputes.
|
|
|
|
This article explores the responsibility of early childhood educators to advocate for young children as both individuals and family members, reviewing legal and administrative guidance under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and exploring possible conflicts between family and professional opinions of the child's best interests. The consequences of not allowing for due process review of parental decisions are also discussed. (ERIC)
|
|
The purpose of this article is to discuss issues that can surface after a special education due process hearing. These include discontent, disagreement, and dissatisfaction. The author provides suggestions for school administrators for overcoming these barriers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discusses the IDEA reauthorization bills from the House and Senate. House bill calls for voluntary binding arbitration. Senate bill requires states to spend funds to implement the mediation process required and to assist parents with ADR and due process.
|
|
|
|
This research examines consumer choices of alternative dispute resolution in light of the various costs and benefits associated with each of those choices. An agency theoretic framework is employed to model the buyer-dispute resolver dyad in terms of a principal and agent relationship. Costs of mode of monitoring and incentive alignments through side payments in this dyadic relationship are envisioned as determinants of the consumer choice. A national random sample of consumers is used to test the hypothesized relationships. Results indicate that as the dollars at risk increase, consumers indicate a preference for litigation, over alternative forms of dispute resolution. (Abstract from author)
|
|
Mediation was required by the Individuals With Disabilities Education (IDEA) 1997, and resolution sessions were added to the IDEA 2004. This study examines the perceptions of 260 special education directors in Georgia, Massachusetts, Washington, and Wisconsin to determine their perceptions regarding alternative dispute resolutions in which they had been involved between 1997 and 2004. Findings indicate that school districts are less likely to use due process as a preferred method of resolving disputes, are using mediation because they are pleased with the outcome, and will use resolution sessions as an option in the future. In the future, state and local educational agencies need to develop guidelines for, encourage the use of, and implement alternative dispute resolutions to resolve differences as it is a win-win situation for all. (ERIC)
|
|
All states are required to offer mediation services for the voluntary settlement of special education disputes after a due process hearing has been requested as a result of the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disability Education Act (IDEA). However, Iowa is one of only a few states that offer an early intervention mediation program available prior to the request for a due process hearing.
This study examined the Iowa Special Education Preappeal Conflict Resolution Conference's attempted early resolution of disputes between parents of children with disabilities and school personnel. Issues examined include participants' perceived satisfaction with the preappeal conferences process, implementation support for the reached agreement, parent-school relationship following mediation, and attorney involvement.
A qualitative methodology case study approach was used in order to more fully understand the perceptions and experiences of parents of children with disabilities, school administrators, intermediate educational agency administrators, and mediators who have participated in a preappeal conference reaching an agreement. A thematic strategy of analysis was used to organize and interpret data. Four themes were identified: events before the preappeal conference, the preappeal conference and its outcomes, events following the preappeal conference, and issues related to preappeal conferences.
Inquiry was based on concepts from the procedural justice theory, which suggests people are more willing to accept outcomes when they are decided fairly. Results indicate participants were satisfied with the preappeal conference, which they viewed as fair. In addition, participants reported no new concerns or significant issues arising following the preappeal conferences. Most school and intermediate educational agency administrators were satisfied with the preappeal conference outcomes, agreement implementation, and parent relationships following the preappeal conferences. Their satisfaction appeared related to whether preappeal conference outcomes supported what they originally proposed or desired and whether the escalation of the conflict was halted.
Parents were divided in their satisfaction of the mediation outcomes. They reported dissatisfaction with the agreement implementation and relationships with school personnel following the preappeal conference. Parent satisfaction appeared related to perception of support received from others during the mediation, the other party's willingness to compromise, and the alignment of reached agreement to desired outcomes.
|
|
Article consists of mostly early theory about effectiveness of mediation. Author believes that special ed. disputes are one of the more appropriate contexts for mediation. Cites Singer & Nace study and states that special ed. mediation is successful in resolving the majority of these disputes, and that parents are positive about outcomes and process. Author believes that parents and educators, not courts, are the appropriate parties to resolve special ed disputes.
|
|
|
|
Law has protected the educational right of students with handicapping conditions and their parents throughout the nation since 1975. All states have a process in place where parents or schools districts can request a due process hearing at the state level. There is substantial evidence that due process cases regarding special education issues have increased throughout the nation. Currently, the primary system in place in California for resolving disagreements regarding Special Education students is state mandated Due Process. Evidence suggests that resolution processes such as mediation and fair hearings do not foster positive working relationships nor build trust between a district and a parent to provide an appropriate education for the child. Because the number of families choosing state level due process is increasing in spite of all these drawbacks, it is critical to take a closer look at viable alternatives. One such alternative that California has begun to explore is Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). The purpose of this study was to identify conditions under which ADR programs implemented in selected SELPAs are successful in their efforts to reduce due process special education hearings throughout California. The three SELPAs studied were identified based on criteria defined by research of what is necessary to have successful ADR programs in the workplace, community, and educational setting. A demographics questionnaire and survey questions were used to gather data to develop a �blueprint� of components necessary for a successful ADR program in a SELPA or a school district. (ABSTRACT BY AUTHOR)
|
|
|
|
Interviews with 22 parents who had participated in a special education appeals process, 16 school officials, and 6 mediators found 8 factors that escalate parent-school conflict: discrepant views of a child or a child's needs, knowledge, service delivery, reciprocal power, constraints, valuation, communication, and trust. (ERIC)
|
|
A review of special-education court cases found that, while school district wins exceeded parent wins in due process hearings and appeals, the margin narrowed through litigation. The most predominant issue in dispute was placement in terms of parents seeking more restrictive settings. The Supreme Court's language in Board of Education v. Rowley concerning deference often guided court outcomes.(ERIC)
|
|
Based on governance-related criteria, this article provides the empirical jurimetric verification of the how, where, when and why alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms provide efficiency enhancing channels to redress grievances in less developed countries. Based on data collected in 16 developing jurisdictions through a representative sample of poor rural households, the analyses contained in this paper identifies criteria within which ADR enjoys a comparative advantage over court-based formal dispute resolution procedures. The piece further addresses comparative and competitive aspects of formal versus informal dispute resolution and provides policy recommendations in order for the state to "assimilate" lessons drawn from the functioning of informal mechanisms. (Abstract from author)
|
|
This study examines the effects of 4 factors in a mediated transfer-pricing negotiation: (a) the mediator's suggestion that negotiators have concern for the other (opposing) negotiator; (b) the mediator's proposal of moderate goals; (c) negotiator power; and (d) culture. In the simulated negotiations that were mediated by a corporate official, participants were 374 subjects from Hong Kong and the United States. Negotiators obtained lower joint outcomes when urged by the mediator to show concern for the other than when not given this admonition. When the mediator proposed moderate (vs. high) goals, the negotiators received lower joint outcomes but had a higher opinion of the mediator. While we expected negotiator power (equal vs. unequal) to interact with suggested concern for the other, it did so only for the negotiators' individual outcomes. Finally, culture produced a main effect: Hong Kong negotiators obtained higher joint outcomes than did their U.S. counterparts. (Abstract from author)
|
[Abstract]
Due process is a key dispute resolution feature approved by Congress in accordance with the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, whose goal is to facilitate resolution and minimize conflict. Nonetheless, despite 35 years of use, due process has become a difficult emotional and financial problem. Consequently, there is a need to evaluate due process and develop less adversarial resolution practices. The goal of the study herein is to place in perspective a descriptive analysis of 575 due process hearings that occurred in 41 states in 2005 to 2006 by analyzing the petitioner, disability, dispute, and outcome including hearings of specific learning disabilities (26%), autism (20%), and health impairments (15%). The most common sources of dispute were placement (25%) and Individualized Education Program and program appropriateness (24%). Parents initiated 85% of the hearings, but school districts prevailed in 59%. Interestingly, the majority of states lacked easy retrieval and consistency with reporting their own published hearings.
|
|
This article presents the results of an experiment conducted by the U.S. Labor Department which examined the merits of grievance mediation relative to arbitration in the coal mining industry. The authors discuss the rationale for conducting the test; resolution of grievances that were submitted to mediation; speed and cost of mediation; attitudes towards mediation and arbitration; mediation techniques; and issues placed under mediation.
|
|
Article provides extensive background on nature and implications of IDEA legislation.
|
Analysis of Comments and Changes Readers who would like to understand the logic behind the regulations are encouraged to read the Analysis of Comments and Changes (Attachment 1) included with the Regulations published in the Federal Register, March 12, 1999. The complete entry from Attachment 1 regarding the regulations under 34 CFR 300.506, Mediation, can be found here.
|
Until recently, special education parent-school disputes in New Jersey were resolved using formal hearing procedures. Participant dissatisfaction with formal hearings has led to the use of an alternative form of dispute resolution, that is mediation.
The purpose of this study was to conduct a descriptive analysis of mediation and formal hearings to resolve parent-school disputes in special education which occurred between July 16, 1984 and July 15, 1985.
Results indicated that sixty-four percent of disputes which resulted in due process requests were resolved through mediation.
The most frequent issue for which due process procedures were requested was the appropriateness of the child's Individualized Education Program (IEP), especially placement. Parents were more frequently the petitioner.
Parents and school districts tended to prevail equally at hearings: parents tended to prevail when the parent was the petitioner and districts when the district was the petitioner. A significant relationship was found between which party prevails at a hearing and whether the party was represented by a lawyer.
The most frequent classification of students for whom due process procedures were requested was Emotionally Disturbed (ED). The most frequent age range of the students for whom disputes were resolved through mediation was 6 through 11 years, and 14 through 18 years for those cases which resulted in a hearing. Most requests for due process procedures came from middle socioeconomic status (SES) communities and from the northern region of New Jersey, the most densely populated area in the state. Most cases that resulted in hearings came from the central region. Requests for due process procedures from low SES communities more frequently involved the issue of IEP-program, while requests from high SES communities more frequently involved the issue of IEP-placement. Regardless of the SES of the community, parents more frequently requested due process procedures than districts. High SES districts and parents tended to prevail equally at hearings. A significant relationship was found between community SES and those cases resolved through mediation conferences versus formal hearing. Cases from high SES communities were resolved more frequently at hearings and cases from low SES communities were resolved more frequently at mediation conferences. (Abstract shortened with permission of author.)
|
|
Conflict is intrinsic to coastal zone management, yet relatively few peer-reviewed studies have examined how coastal managers might apply conflict resolution processes in the coastal zone management (CZM) context. The authors believe that many of these disputes can be addressed by using a structured mediation model that involves face-to-face negotiation with a broad range of stakeholders to build consensus-based agreements for integrated coastal zone management (ICZM). To explore this further, the article examines four questions. First, it examines how CZM literature characterizes conflict and conflict resolution. Second, it looks at how essential principles from the field of alternative dispute resolution and environmental mediation can be best employed in the ICZM context. In particular, it explores the various elements of a stepwise agreement building model, a mediated negotiation process model the authors use in practice that bases its success on a foundation of four principles: representation, participation, legitimacy, and accountability. Next, it details three essential tools used in this process, stakeholder analysis, joint factfinding, and single-text negotiation, that the authors believe to be promising for developing and adopting stable, well-informed, and implementable agreements for ICZM. Finally, the article examines how these structuring principles and process strategies have been used in two recent case studies regarding the management of the San Francisco estuary and its tributaries. (Abstract from author)
|
|
This article presents interview research with education officials, parents and parent advocates concerning Scotland's experience with mediation in special education issues.
The authors address the following questions: "(1) how are low-level intervention strategies used by schools and local authorities in Scotland to prevent disputes arising in the field of additional support needs or to deal with them at an early stage?; (2) what are informants' perceptions of the new ADR mechanisms, specifically mediation and adjudication?; and (3) what do key informants perceive to be the pros and cons of the new ASN tribunal?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The authors of this study examined published hearing officer decisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to determine whether they were representative of the frequency and outcomes for the larger group consisting of published decisions and the much greater number of unpublished decisions. An empirical analysis of the fully adjudicated hearing officer cases in six randomly selected states revealed that the published sample was variably and, in general, questionably representative of the overall group of such decisions in terms of frequency and outcomes across time. More specifically, in terms of frequency, the representativeness of the published decisions, although moderate for the nation, varied widely from one state to another and was markedly limited for most individual states on a year-by-year basis. In terms of outcomes, the representativeness of the published sample also varied from state to state and was particularly suspect on a year-by-year basis within most states. On a collapsed-years basis, there was a statistically significant difference between the study sample's out-come distributions and those in three of the six states, and a questionable congruence with a fourth state. The likely reasons for the limited representativeness include incomplete submission by some state education agencies, inconsistent selection by the publisher, and variance in the categorization of the year and decision outcome. Although the authors recommend undertaking further research, they caution against the generalizability of published hearing officer decisions, particularly in examining longitudinal trends within individual states. (Abstract from author)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assuring the Family's Role on the Early Intervention Team This paper, produced and distributed by the National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (NECTAC), is a synthesis of practices and ideas for explaining procedural safeguards to families, which assure that families are fully informed in ways that support their role in the early intervention process.
|
|
|
|
|
Audio: CADRE Presents At SPIDR CADRE: Providing National ADR Technical Support for Special Education Disputes was presented by a panel of national leaders at The Society Of Professionals in Dispute Resolution(SPIDR) 27th Annual Conference that was held in Baltimore.
|
