special education mediation state model delaware inter-american summit on conflict resolution...
TRANSCRIPT
Special Education MediationState Model
Delaware
Inter-American Summit on Conflict Resolution EducationCleveland, Ohio, USA
March 14, 2007
Presented by Fran Fletcher and Kathy WianUniversity of Delaware’s Conflict Resolution Program
About Delaware
TOTAL POPULATION @ 900,000White 75% - Black 20% - Other 5%
City of Wilmington 70,000 ►New Castle County 520,000►
Kent County 140,000►
Sussex County 170,000►2040 Square Miles
Delaware Student Statistics
19 school districts192 public schools14 charter schools
and a variety of public and private programs
More than 120,000 public education students*51% have a learning disability (9,897)*11% have a cognitive impairment (2,193)*10% have another health impairment (1,934)
Conflict Resolution Program
Established 1994
University of Delaware
Self-sustaining office
Provide dispute resolution
services throughout DE– Education– State and Local Government– Nonprofits
CRP First Steps
• Conducted a statewide needs assessment re: dispute resolution in education
• Offered customized dispute resolution trainings, facilitated problem solving, mediation, strategic planning and organizational development.
• DOE first customers
The Collaboration
University of Delaware’s
Conflict Resolution Program
and
Delaware Department of Education’s
Exceptional Children’s Team
SPARC
Special Education
Partnership for the
Amicable
Resolution of
Conflict
SPARC
The project supports addressing conflicts at the lowest possible level and build the capacity of parents and school personnel to address and resolve conflicts as they arise.
Mediation
TrainingIEP Facilitation
Delaware Hearing Statistics* Number of hearings requested & number of requests that were fully adjudicated:
2004-2005 - 32 requests, 8 decisions2005-2006 - 11 requests, 4 decisions2006-now - 17 requests, 2 decisions
What happened to the rest? Mediation Negotiated settlements Voluntary or involuntary dismissals
*Delaware Department of Education Statistics
Mediation Overview
Mediation
Voluntary
Free
Open to all Requests
Mediator Qualifications
• Complete the 18-hour SPARC basic mediation training or its equivalent from a qualified trainer.
• Complete the six-hour SPARC special education law workshop for hearing officers offered by DOE or an equivalent.
• Participate in six hours of instruction, annually, in mediation and/or special education law.
Mediator Qualifications
• Demonstrate knowledge in the laws and regulations relating to the provisions of special education and related services.
• Demonstrate effective mediation techniques with observation and feedback with an emphasis on facilitative process techniques and remain a neutral third party.
• Must not hold primary employment with a local or state education agency.
SPARC Mediation Statistics
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1996-1997
1998-1999
2000-2001
2002-2003
2004-2005
2006-
DPM
NDPM
Mediation Evaluation
1996-2006
Actual Mediation Evaluation Results
Responses = 151 Did this mediation result in an agreement between you and the other
party?
Yes (125) No ( 20 ) Somewhat ( 1 ) No Answer ( 5 )
Overall, how satisfied were you with the results of mediation?
Very Satisfied (19) Satisfied (114) Neutral (7) Dissatisfied (5)
Very Dissatisfied (1) Not Sure (3) No Response (2)
Based on this experience, would you contact CRP and request mediation services for future special education disputes?
Yes (122) No ( 2 ) Don’t Know ( 1 ) Maybe ( 1 ) No Response ( 25 )
Research
2000
“Enhancing the Collaborative
Capacity of Individualized
Education Programs (IEPs)
in Delaware Schools”
Research Methodology
• Hired external consultant to work with CRP• Focus group data from past SPARC training
efforts• Survey data from Special Education Supervisors• Additional 6 months of school assessments in
five school districts• Observational and participant feedback data
from IEP meetings
IEP Meeting Observation• Technical Expertise• Purpose/Goals of Meeting• Neutral, Encouraging
Language• Student History/Performance• Non-Verbals• Relationship/Trust• Use of the IEP Form• Special Issues• Conflicts/Impasse• Questioning, Active
Listening/Communication• Greetings/Introductions• Materials/Preparation
• Pace• Participants• Annual Goals/Objectives• Post-Meeting Follow Up• Action Planning• Consensus Building/Decision
Making• Team Roles• Room set up & Seating• Mtg Debrief/Reflection/Eval• A/V Resources• Brainstorming• Participation Formats
Research Findings
While requests for due process & mediation are minimal, anecdotal evidence from schools, families & family advocates suggests that collaboration remains elusive in special education.
Research Findings
Limitations to collaboration in the IEP process present themselves throughout the perceived legalistic quality of required forms & safeguards, abbreviated IEP meetings, attendance by general & special education teachers who are not brought into the process & meeting facilitators untrained in basic collaborative processes.
Research Findings
Limitations are further exacerbated when families & advocates are distrustful of the people & processes involved with IEPs or simply uncomfortable with the process.
Ten Realistic Ways to Build Collaboration in Individualized
Education Program (IEP) Meetings
Training and coaching provided through the Special Education Partnership for the Amicable
Resolution of Conflict (SPARC)a program of the Conflict Resolution Program
in cooperation with the Delaware Department of Education
Nine Training Session Options
• Introduction to the Mediation Process
• Facilitation 101• Your Conflict
Management Style• Where do These
Parents Come From? • Resolving Difficult
Dynamics and Conflict in IEPs
• Are You Hearing Me?• Brainstorming and
Problem Solving? • Decision Making and
Action Planning• A/V and the IEP• IEP Coaching
Why would a room full of educated, caring professionals, who come together to focus on the welfare of a child, need a
facilitator?
Resolving at the Lowest Level
Mediation
IssueIEP FacilitationResolution Meeting
Due Process
Keeping the Team Intact
And, last but not least….
someone to manage the event.
May / May Not
be an IEP Team Member
And the Facilitator is….
Internal?External?
AdvantagesNeutral to the outcomeFresh set of eyesAddresses power imbalances Manages “bad” behavior and high emotionDisadvantagesRole confusion/expectationNo follow-upNo control over participants or the system
AdvantagesKnows team membersKnows systemAnticipates problems & resolve before meeting begins
Disadvantages Knows team membersKnows systemYou are an employee
Neutral Perspective Ask “stupid” questions Not tied to outcome Agenda is inclusive No dual roles Power Imbalances Deal with emotions Full participation Address “bad behavior” Advantages to “taking the heat”
Additional Advantages of Using an External Facilitator
The External IEP Meeting Facilitator
● A member of the team, therefore, does not, suggest, impose or participate in team decisions or solutions
● A legal expert
● An advocate
● An arbitrator
~IS NOT~
Teams May Request a Facilitator When…
►History
►Communication
►Requested
►Apprehension
►Focus
►Multiple meetings
IEP Facilitator
Primary responsibility is to the process of the meeting rather than the content or outcome.
Process vs. Content
Process deals with…
Communication Problem solving Participation Agenda items Gaining agreement Relationships Understanding Timing
Content deals with…
Evaluation Assessments Legal rights/the
law Opinions Records Data Ideas Information
Facilitator Qualities
EXCELLENT COMMUNICATION SKILLS
FACILITATIVE “LEADERSHIP” STYLE
PATIENT AND COMPOSED
OBJECTIVE AND NEUTRAL
A fair and consistent process
Cooperative participation occurs
Communication improves
Trust is Built
Effective IEP is created
Buy-in achieved
Sustained IEP
Benefits
Mediation vs. IEP Meeting Facilitation
• The differences are…
• The similarities are…
Overview Per Year
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Cases
Inquires
Facilitated
IEP Signed
University of Delaware
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-
Impact on DP & Mediation
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cases# DPMediated
University of Delaware
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-
Challenges School District
Repeat RequestsUnderstanding RoleRealistic Time FrameAsking for AssistanceSchool Requests
Parent
Repeat Requests Understanding Role Realistic Time FrameAsking for AssistanceParent Requests
Wait for Crisis Team Preparation Supporting All Can’t Change Follow Up
IEP Meeting Facilitation Evaluations2000-2005
Actual IEP Meeting Facilitation Evaluation ResultsResponses = 85
Goals of the meetingPoor 1= ( 2 ) 2= ( 6 ) 3= ( 11 ) 4=( 27 ) 5 = ( 39 ) Good(Conflicting; unclear; (Clear, shared by all, diverse, unacceptable) endorsed with enthusiasm)
Content of the meeting Poor 1= ( 5 ) 2= ( 9 ) 3= ( 16 ) 4= ( 26 ) 5= ( 29 ) Good(Not instructional; I did not (I learned a lot; was learn much; not informative; informative; I’ll be able tocontent; to use the content; contenttoo much process; not appropriate to our needs)
enough content)
Relationship among meeting participants Poor 1= ( 6 ) 2= ( 9 ) 3= ( 22 ) 4= ( 23 ) 5= ( 25 ) Good(My relationship with them is the (Our relationship is muchsame as before; I feel antagonistic improved; I trust them moretoward many of them; I don’t than I did prior to the session; trust them; there is little I feel I got to know & under-potential for a future relationship) stand many of them better;
there is a good potential for
the future)
Next Logical Step
Training school and district personnel to run more effective IEP meetings.
IEP Training
Intended Outcome:• Trained personnel
would become “in-house” resource
= share skills with team members
= facilitate challenging meetings
Outcome: • Trained personnel did
not have time to incorporate
= no training occurred
= limited time to travel between schools
= changed jobs
The New Hot Topic
10/50
Designing the System
Volunteers
Mediators
Retired SchoolPersonnel
DOE
Grants
Districts
Parents
$
Advocates
Lessons Learned Clear Policies & Procedures Intervening Agency How to Fund Requests Districts Have Financial Investment Advocacy Groups
People Just Want To Be Heard
IDEIA 2004
Resolution Meeting:
1
Policy Supports & Challenges
Informal Policy SupportsDOE Staff and Director
Formal SupportsIDEANCLB
ChallengesNew Federal and State Mandates
Thank You
Conflict Resolution ProgramUniversity of Delaware
177 Graham Hall Newark, DE 19716
Website: www.ipa.udel.edu/crp
Fran Fletcher Kathy Wian 302-831-6812 [email protected] [email protected]