MMSD – DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
Informational
Bulletin
#9
Informational Bulletin #9
October 2002
In January 2002, the Department of Public Instruction conducted an onsite review of our school district’s
implementation of the requirements of IDEA. The overall report was very positive about our efforts to comply with
state and federal law. More importantly, the report complimented our district on the noteworthy positive aspects of
our district’s services for children with disabilities. This positive report reflects the combined efforts of central office
and school-based staff, and I want to thank you for your continuing hard work and commitment to our students.
As part of the onsite review, the DPI consultants identified a number of requirements that our district is not
consistently implementing correctly. As a required participant on IEP teams, I felt it was important to inform you of
the required changes in our practices which will affect your work as an IEP team participant.
We have also included in this Bulletin information about the new Wisconsin Alternate Assessment and the
promotion guidelines for students with disabilities.
If you have questions regarding the changes or clarifications described in this Informational Bulletin, please contact
Marian Matthews, Program Support Teacher – Professional Development (663-8478, mmatthews@madison.k12.wi.us)
or the special education coordinator for your level/area:
 Curt Weber (East/La Follette Elementary ): 663-8489, cweber@madison.k12.wi.us
 Jan Duxstad (West/Memorial Elementary): 663-8487, jduxstad@madison.k12.wi.us
 Scott Zimmerman (Middle Schools): 663-8486, slzimmeramn@madison.k12.wi.us
 Ted Szalkowski (High Schools): 663-8491, tszalkowski@madison.k12.wi.us
Jack Jorgensen, Executive Director
Corrective Actions for Completion of IEPs
Description of how the student’s disability affects involvement in general curriculum
Required practice: For school-age children, the IEP must describe how the student’s disability affects the student’s
involvement and progress in the general curriculum (or for preschool children, how the child’s disability affects the
child’s participation in age-appropriate activities).
DPI concern: In some IEPs, this description was omitted.
Clarification: The IEP must describe how the student’s disability affects the student’s involvement and
progress in the general curriculum (or for preschool children, how the child’s disability affects the child’s
participation in age-appropriate activities). For example: Jay has been identified as a student with an
Emotional-Behavioral Disability who exhibits frequent mood swings, high levels of distractibility, and low
tolerance for frustration. When feeling anxious or frustrated, Jay may refuse to write and should be given
the option to dictate answers.
Extent to which student will not participate in the general curriculum (or age-appropriate activities)
Required practice: The IEP must explain the extent, if any, to which the student will not participate with nondisabled students in the general curriculum (or for preschool children in age-appropriate activities).
DPI concern: Some IEP teams, after indicating the student would not be full-time in the general curriculum,
provided an incorrect explanation by describing the student’s removal from regular education environments. The
IEP team’s explanation should have described the extent to which the student would not participate in the general
curriculum.
Clarification: The IEP must contain an explanation of the extent, if any, to which the student is not expected
to achieve the same curricular goals as non-disabled students. For example: Ariana will not participate in
the 9th grade English curriculum.
Supplementary aids and services and program modifications or supports for school personnel: description
of frequency and amount
Required practice: The description of the frequency and amount of supplementary aids and services and program
modifications or supports for school personnel must be sufficiently specific.
DPI concern: The statements of the frequency/amount of service on some IEPs were not sufficiently specific. For
example, IEPs described the frequency/amount as “as needed”, rather than indicating an amount of time or
describing the circumstances under which the service would be required.
Clarification: The description of the frequency/amount of service must be sufficiently specific. The use of
the phrase “as needed” to describe the frequency/amount is not permitted.
Example for supplementary aids and services: For a supplementary aid and service such as Use of an
assistive listening device, the frequency/amount could be appropriately described as either one hour daily,
or during all large group lecture activities.
Example for program modifications or supports for school personnel: For a program modification or
support such as Consultation between special education and regular education teaching staff, the
frequency/amount could be appropriately described as either 30 minutes a week, or within one school day
of a behavioral crisis requiring removal to a safe space.
Wisconsin Alternate Assessment
As a result of a review of the Wisconsin assessment system conducted by the U.S. Department of Education, the
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) recently made changes to the state’s assessment system. One
change included the way in which alternate assessments are conducted for students with disabilities.
The DPI has created the Wisconsin Alternate Assessment (WAA) to assess the educational performance of
students with disabilities who cannot meaningfully take the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations
(WKCE), even with accommodations. The WAA is not a test. Rather, it is a checklist completed by teachers which
focuses on knowledge and skills that are aligned with the Wisconsin Model Academic Standards in reading,
language arts, mathematics, science and social studies. The WAA is now the only alternate assessment that may
be used for students who do not participate in the WKCE in 4 th, 8th, and 10th grades. In addition, our district will
require the use of the WAA for those students who are unable to meaningfully participate, even with
accommodations, in the WRCT in 3rd grade and the TerraNova administered in the 5th, 6th and 7th grades.
Students must meet the eligibility criteria for the WAA in order for it to be used as the alternate assessment. IEP
teams will continue to have the responsibility to determine whether a student participates in statewide and
districtwide assessments (with or without accommodations) or whether the child meets the eligibility criteria for the
WAA.
Promotion Guidelines for Students with Disabilities
Beginning September 1, 2002 the Madison school district implemented a new policy regarding the promotion of
students from 4th to 5th grade and from 8th to 9th grade. Information regarding this new policy and the criteria for
promotion was distributed previously to parents and teachers through letters and brochures (available in English,
Spanish and Hmong), and through information on the district’s web site (www.madison.k12.wi.us/topics/promotion).
The Board of Education approved recommendations for promotion criteria for students with disabilities that will
enable them to continue to be educated with their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate. The
promotion criteria allow for the promotion of students with disabilities to be governed either by the MMSD
Promotion Policy or by the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP).
The decision regarding the basis of promotion is made by the student’s IEP team. Parents and regular education
teachers, as IEP team participants, contribute to this IEP team decision. Sets of guiding questions have been
developed to assist IEP teams in making the decision regarding the most appropriate basis of promotion.
Informational meetings were recently conducted at elementary and middle schools for special education teachers
and speech and language pathologists to provide them with more detailed information about the guiding questions
and overall promotion guidelines.