Before The
State Of Wisconsin
DIVISION OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

The Parties to this proceeding are:

On April 8, 2002, the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) received a request for a due process hearing under Wis. Stat. Subchapter V, Chapter 115, and the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. §1400, et seq., from [Father], parent of [Student] (Student).

1. The Student is in the 8th grade at Eisenhower Middle School in the District. He has been identified as a child with a disability under IDEA as other health impairment as a result of a diagnosis of Asberger's syndrome.

2. The District offered all of the students in the Eisenhower Middle School 8th grade the opportunity to attend a 3-day extracurricular trip to Washington, D.C. to begin on April 15, 2002. This trip cost each student just under $800. Twenty-three of the 175 students in the 8th grade are going to be attending this extracurricular trip.

3. The students and their parents were informed at a meeting on November 12, 2001 of the requirements for attending this trip. Among the requirements, the students had to have displayed satisfactory behavior performance during the semester preceding the trip. This behavior was to be determined from the rules of the Eisenhower Middle School handbook.

4. On March 20, 2002, the District met with the Student's parents and told them that the District had made the determination that the Student's behavior in the semester preceding the trip had been unsatisfactory and denied permission for him to attend the trip. The District considered waiving the behavioral requirement based upon the Student's disability, but decided to not waive the requirement in order to protect the safety and welfare of the Student and others.

5. The Student's disability causes behavior problems. He has difficulty with socialization and if he feels that he has been treated unfairly by another student or a teacher, he will lash out verbally and become very loud. His behavior became worse after Christmas break and at least one incident involved the Student throwing a chair while yelling in anger. He also has difficulty with falling asleep in class as a side effect of his medication. The District made the decision to not allow the Student to attend the trip because the trip was going to be very fast-paced with long days and because of the heightened security at the airports and government buildings in Washington, D.C. The District determined that if the Student lashed out because of stress caused by the pace and length of the trip, this could cause a safety problem for himself and others on the trip.

6. The Student's medication had been changed over the Christmas break and may have caused his behavior to worsen. His medication has now been increased back to normal levels, which may improve his behavior. He has been able to attend several Boy Scout overnight trips with minimal difficulty if he is given a safe place or person to be with when he feels stress. The District considered this information and determined that this was not enough reassurance that the Student's behavior would be in control for the duration of the trip.

7. The parents requested a reconsideration of this decision and another meeting was held with the parents and District representatives on March 29, 2002. A letter of determination dated April 4, 2002 was sent to the parents stating that the District had not changed its determination and the Student was not allowed to attend the trip.

8. The parents' requested an IEP (individualized education program) meeting and the IEP team met on April 10, 2002. The team determined that the extracurricular trip to Washington, D.C. was not a necessary component of the Student's educational plan. The parents disagreed with this determination. Prior to this meeting, there was nothing in the Student's IEP about extracurricular activities.

9. The District has complied with the procedures set forth in IDEA. There has not been any allegation that there was any procedural defect in the Student's IEP.

10. The Student's IEP developed through IDEA procedures is reasonably calculated to enable the Student to receive educational benefits. The Student is receiving passing grades in all of his classes and is making progress in the goals, objectives and benchmarks found in his IEP.

Under IDEA, the District is required to provide a free and appropriate public education to the Student. The United States Supreme Court interpreted the meaning of "appropriate education" in Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982) with a two part test:

1. The New Berlin School District is the prevailing party.

2. The Individualized Education Program developed by the New Berlin School District for the Student was reasonably calculated to provide the Student with a meaningful educational benefit and has provided him with a free and appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400, et seq. and Wis. Stat. ch. 115.

3. The New Berlin School District determination to not allow the Student to attend the extracurricular trip to Washington, D.C. did not deny a free and appropriate public education to the Student.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the request to order the New Berlin School District to all the Student to attend the extracurricular trip to Washington, D.C. is denied and the due process hearing request be dismissed with prejudice.

APPEAL TO COURT: Within 45 days after the decision of the administrative law judge has been issued, either party may appeal the decision to the circuit court for the county in which the child resides under §115.80(7), Wis. Stats., or to federal district court pursuant to U.S.C. §1415 and 34 C.F.R. §300.512.