1979-11-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

a handicapped child is mainstreamed into a class with non- handicapped students. ~ne fourth issue is the question of recommending that a handicapped child be placed in a residential center. The fifth issue is the roll of the consultant in this particular situation as well as perhaps in general and number six is the issue of setting a precedent. He stated that the law requires all school divisions to provide those handicapped students that are found to be eligible for speCial services with a free appropriate education in the least restrictive environment, regardless of the cost. He stated the proposed educational program for one hearing impaired child was not acceptable to the parents and the school board has meticulously followed legal procedures in responding to this appeal. The process has culminated in a requirement Dy the state hearing officer that the school board ~ngage a consultant with expertise in services for hearing impaired children to make recommendations for provisions of services to the child as well as for all hearing impaired children in general. He stated~the~board was.~constrained to make its judgement on the appropriateness of service in this matter irrespective to cost. The local hearing officer observed that the law emphasizes that the school division should provide services based on appropriateness and not on th~ current services available. He stated tne ability of the community to finance the requested services is a matter for the Council to decide. He stated the School Board does not have the $32~000 in its current budget and should the Council turn down the request the board will have to reassess whia'n ? of these services it can provide from the School Budget. He stated the consultant was selected from a list provided to Dr. Ellena by the State and the consultant's recommendations were submitted to our local Special Education Advisory Committee, which were endorsed with only minormodifi-cati~ns and recormnended the school board acceptance of them. The consultant stated in his report that there is no doubt, in this consultants opinion, that cued speech is appropriate for this student. The student has responded well to the use of cued speech and it would be inappropriate to consider a change in method. %~e consultant did note that the use of cued speech must be re-evaluated periodically in the future for this student to insure that progress is being made. He stated other consultants could be aSked to address ~his matter but it is doubtful that another hearing impaired specialist would propose a radical departure from the cued.~ speech mode of instruction. He also asked a basic question, is it desirable to engage a second consultant in a matter of this kind because you disagree with the conclusions of the first consultant?