The What, the Why, and the How of
Justification of Removal from the
General Education Classroom
The Legal Definition or Requirement of LRE
Least Restrictive Environment- the place the child would be educated if they
did not have a disability- this is the same as the “Educational Environment ”
code that is reported by districts.
To the maximum extent appropriate, children with
disabilities, including children in public or private
institutions or other care facilities, are educated with
children who are not disabled and special classes,
separate schooling, and other removal of children with
disabilities from the regular education environment,
occurs only when the nature of or severity of the disability
of the child is such that education in regular classes with
the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be
achieved satisfactorily.
20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(5)(A) (IDEA ‘04)
WHAT is a “justification statement”,
and when do we need one?
Exactly what it sounds like… when we have fully
explored adaptations and supports for a student
in their current placement, and the student does
not experience success, we have to justify our
decision to move the student to a more
restrictive placement.
• No longer can we just put a
“canned” statement in the IEP to
allow us to move a student for
anything other than the best
interest of the student.
Making a change to a student’s schedule that
reduces time in the general education
environment is sometimes unavoidable, due to
a student’s individual needs.
That change triggers the need for the
“justification statement” on the Individual
Education Program.
Before we make that change, remember, we’re
not just changing where a child is educated. It
also changes…..
• …time for students to interact with their peers
that may or may not have disabilities.
• …exposure to the general education
curriculum at the level that it is experienced in
the regular classroom.
• …opportunity for incidental social and
academic learning.
Special education is not “one size fits
all…”
• Children are individuals, and so are their
needs- what may work well for one may not
work at all for another!
• When this happens, the full IEP TEAM has to
carefully examine the supports being provided
and consider the best interests of the child.
So, when a placement change is needed, to provide the
best possible service to a student…AND this change will
reduce this student’s time in general education…
NOW we need the statement!
A “justification statement” is required on the IEP in
order to provide a concrete reason that explains which
aspects of the individual student’s needs cannot be
met in general education. It must be supportable, as
research has been shown that time in general
education improves student outcomes.
WHY does this statement have to be
so specific and student needs based?
• The law says that we MUST:
• …. clearly outline the IEP team’s discussion, with
serious consideration given to the “potential harmful
effects” of removing the student from the general
education setting and from their peers.
(http://doe.sd.gov/oess/documents/SPED_IEP_Justificati
onStatements.pdf)
So, HOW do we write these
statements?
• Start with what we know the student
needs. The statement cannot just
describe the placement option. It has
to go beyond the surface information
and be unique to the student’s
learning needs and characteristics.
The Justification MUST:
• …. clearly outline the IEP team’s discussion,
with serious consideration given to the
“potential harmful effects” of removing the
student from the general education setting
and from their peers.
(http://doe.sd.gov/oess/documents/SPED_IEP_J
ustificationStatements.pdf)
Justification statements
MUST NOT BE:
*based on non-individualized reason
*based on administrative convenience
*based on disability category identical to all
other students in that placement (an example of this would
be that the student would be placed in the “autism
classroom”)
(http://doe.sd.gov/oess/documents/SPED_IEP_JustificationStatements
.pdf)
Must not be…
*based on availability of related services
*based on availability of services
*based on availability of space
• (http://doe.sd.gov/oess/documents/SPED_IEP_Ju
stificationStatements.pdf)
So what does a “good” justification
statement look like?!
• SCENARIO: Your student has been in the general education classroom
for 3 months- he/she began the school year there. After implementing
adaptations and ongoing consultation between general and regular ed
teachers and support staff, he/she is still not being successful. The IEP
team has met and reviewed the adaptations and determined that
going to the “resource room” for 2 classes per day is critical to improve
reading skills in order to maximize the student’s outcomes. It might
look like this:
•
STATEMENT: (Student) requires
additional repetitive reading
interventions that allow time for self correction and repeated
drill and practice to master concepts at each level before
introducing a new skill level. (Student) requires additional
time to speak without being interrupted or hurried.
(http://doe.sd.gov/oess/documents/SPED_IEP_JustificationStatements.pdf)
What if that placement doesn’t work,
either?!
And- even after the resource pullout placement has been
tried, with planning and implementation of strategies, the
student continues to be unsuccessful, due in large part to
the student’s distractibility.
The team has decided that even a resource room
placement will not provide the needed level of support.
We need to provide a statement of why the “regular ed”
room AND the “resource” room are not appropriate.
So, the statement portion might look
like this…
• Regular Classroom with Modifications: Rejected:
Instruction with peer tutoring and accommodations in the general
education setting affected her self esteem. (Student) requires more
intense instruction on concepts and additional practice.
• Resource Room: Rejected: This setting did not meet (student’s)
educational needs. Even with the modifications to the curriculum and one
to one re-teaching of skills, he/she could not maintain the pace and level
of learning. She needs a curriculum which focuses on functional concepts.
• Self-Contained: Accepted:
(Student) requires a more functional curriculum and practical daily
experiences that will lead to greater future independence. (Student)
needs an individualized program tailored to learning style with additional
practice to master skills and extended support in managing her adaptive
behavior.
• (http://doe.sd.gov/oess/documents/SPED_IEP_JustificationStatements.pd
f)
• Thank you so much for taking your time to be
with us today!
• If you have questions and need more
information, give us a call!
• Mandy Waggoner
Project CHOICES
awaggoner60@gmail.com