In re: Student v. Nashoba Regional School District – BSEA #19-09691

Dec 06, 2019

OUTCOME: Parents and Student Prevail

In Re: Flavio & Beverly Public Schools – BSEA # 18-10763

Aug 14, 2018

OUTCOME: Parents prevail in prehearing motion

Attorney Wong recently prevailed in a discovery dispute at the Bureau of Special Education Appeals ("BSEA"). The BSEA does not always publish its rulings, so this Order provides some insight into preh ... earing motion practice at the BSEA. The Ruling was issued in response to the District's request for a protective order. The Parents believe the school's program for their child is not appropriate, and requested, among other things the redacted IEPs of the other students in their child's school program. The District argued that the Parents' request was intrusive, irrelevant and overly burdensome. The District further contended that the production of sensitive information about other students would violate the privacy rights of those students without a countervailing benefit to the student (given the pseudonym "Flavio" by the hearing officer." Attorney Wong successfully argued that information about the student's cognitive, educational and behavioral characteristics were critical to their assessment of the appropriateness of the District's program. In addition, Attorney Wong, relaying on a "long line of consistent decision" at the BSEA, established that the documents sought, appropriately cleansed of all potentially identifying student information, are not immune from disclosure in special education administrative hearings. As the Hearing Officer explained, "Furthermore, as the information requested by the Parents goes to the heart of their assertion that the peer group in which Beverly proposes to educate the Student is inappropriate for him, the Parents’ discovery requests are directly relevant to one of their primary claims. The Parents’ discovery request is carefully limited in time, nature and scope and is thus not overbroad to accomplish its stated purpose in this administrative hearing. Arguing educational incompatibility is a common, and important, element of many FAPE claims. The accepted peer IEPs sought by the Parents provide critical information known to the School, and not otherwise readily ascertainable by the Parents before hearing, about the level, materials and strategies of instruction, as well as student/adult presence, movement, behaviors and expectations. Anyone reasonably familiar with the development and implementation of individualized education programs in Massachusetts can glean the necessary relevant information from those documents without reference to, or knowledge of, any individual student." This Ruling is important because it provides Parents' with an additional published ruling explaining the redacted IEPs provide "critical information" for their BSEA case.

In Re: Student v. Andover BSEA # 18-05127

Jul 09, 2018

OUTCOME: Parents and Student prevail

Student has a severe language-based learning disability (dyslexia). Despite tremendous dedication and effort by Andover staff, collaboration and support from Parents, and persistence and hard work by S ... tudent, Student has not made effective progress in acquiring literacy skills during his three years in the district. The second grade program that Andover did establish for the 2017-2018 school year was not appropriate for Student at that time, and the third grade program will not be appropriate for him for the portion of third grade addressed in this matter because it is not the fully self-contained, cohesive, intensive program with closely matched peers that Student needs in order to make effective progress. On the other hand, the Landmark School is an approved, well-established, highly specialized school that is designed and equipped to meet the needs of children like Student, and is highly appropriate for Student, who already has begun to make progress since enrolling there.

In Re: Student v. Arlington Public Schools BSEA # 16-11465

Aug 09, 2016

OUTCOME: Parents prevail in prehearing motion

At times, information shared informally between teachers/service providers and parents/ students or between school personnel may not be maintained in the ordinary course because the communication occur ... s via a private telephone, or computer, and is discarded or may be kept in a private device. This is particularly so with information shared via emails or text messages. While much of this information may be inconsequential, some may be relevant as to the student’s academic and/or emotional functioning, and or a staff’s impressions or concerns regarding the student. These snapshots may bear direct relevance to the appropriateness of a student’s program and placement as they may provide insightful information as to what works or not with a student, and therefore, should be part of the student’s record. However, because of the private nature of the device used for communicating, there may be a false sense of privacy regarding those communications; while the device may be private, the communications are not. As such, the communications are discoverable whether or not they are contained in the student record.

In Re: Randolph Public Schools BSEA # 10-5994

Apr 09, 2010

OUTCOME: Parents Prevail

Randolph’s most recently proposed IEP calling for Student to be placed in a substantially-separate classroom at TLC at the Lyons Elementary School is not reasonably calculated to provide Student with a ... free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment because Student can be appropriately and safely placed and educated within the less restrictive environment of a general education classroom.