Changes to Indiana's Article 7

The people who have signed this petition are concerned with the changes being made to Indiana's Article 7, and request that the State Advisory Council, the Indiana Department of Education, and all legislative bodies take note. Our concerns are as follows:

PARENTAL CONSENT
Currently, schools are required to obtain parental consent to all parts of a child's IEP, which is to be created during a case conference committee meeting. Proposed Article 7 removes this requirement and allows a school to implement an IEP without parental consent. We are opposed to this change. This change encourages an "us vs. them" mentality, as parents' voices will be increasingly ignored while developing IEPs.

PRESCHOOL
Currently, preschoolers with special needs in Indiana receive a minimum of 12.5 hours of school per week, in classrooms limited to 8 students for every teacher and aide, or 10 students for every teacher and two aides. Proposed Article 7 removes these minimum requirements. We are opposed to this change. Tight school budgets will encourage schools to cut corners, despite the fact that early intervention for children with special needs is essential. While money might be saved in the short term by giving children less school in bigger classrooms, more money will have to be spent later to remediate these children's educational problems.

EVALUATIONS
Currently, Article 7 allows 60 educational days for evaluations to be completed. The federal government has recommended that the timeline be 60 calendar days. Proposed Article 7 keeps the 60 educational days timeline. We are opposed to this provision. Children who are referred for an evaluation between February and June often wait six months for their evaluations to be completed under the current scheme. This is an unreasonable amount of delay in the education of a child. If the federal government says to do it in 60 calendar days, we should DO it in 60 calendar days.

BSEA
Currently in Indiana, when a party has a due process hearing and a decision is rendered by a hearing officer, the decision may be appealed to the Board of Special Education Appeals (BSEA). The BSEA serves as an appellate court and reviews decisions for error. Only after the BSEA has ruled can parties appeal to an actual court. There are big problems with the BSEA - first, they are paid by the Department of Education. Second, pretty much anybody who doesn't work for a school can be on the Board (no legal knowledge is required). The people reviewing appeals in Indiana are paid by the DOE and aren't lawyers - not good. We are opposed to the BSEA. Forcing parties to appeal twice to get to an actual judge is a waste of time and money. Most other states (41 of them) allow parties to appeal directly to a court. The BSEA does not add any expertise to the process. Lastly, out of 85 decisions (at last count) the BSEA had only reversed a decision so that it was now in favor of a parent ONCE. And that one time was because the school didn't bother to file anything for the BSEA to review.

WHERE'S THE MONEY?
We want to know where the money that schools receive to education children with special needs is going. We hear over and over again that the school doesn't have enough money to hire another occupational therapist, or a speech therapist, or to provide sensory tools for children with autism. However, we know they get extra money each year for each child with a disability. We would like a provision entered into Article 7 that tracks the money. As taxpayers, we have a right to know how our money is being spent.

As you make your final revisions to Article 7, please think of us and our children. We are voters and taxpayers, your friends and neighbors. Help us education our children.