You are here

IDEA Complaint Decision 22-057

On June 25, 2022, the Department of Public Instruction (department) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from #### (complainant) against the #### (district). This is the department’s decision regarding the complaint. The issues are whether the district, during the 2021-22 school year, properly implemented the individualized education programs of two students with disabilities regarding the provision of specially designed instruction and provided special education using properly licensed staff.

Properly implemented the individualized education programs (IEPs) of two students with disabilities regarding the provision of specially designed instruction.

The complainant, who is the parent of two students at the school who both have IEPs, alleges that two special education teachers were late to school on a regular basis: Teacher A up to 15 minutes and Teacher B up to 45 minutes. The complainant did not provide the department’s investigator with specific dates of the alleged tardiness or evidence of the extent of the tardiness on any specific occasion. Information submitted by the district indicates Teacher A was responsible for providing specially designed instruction for both of the complainant’s children; however, none of that instruction was scheduled for the first 15 minutes of the school day. Further, information submitted by the district indicates Teacher B was not responsible for providing specially designed instruction to either of the complainant’s children and was not scheduled to provide specially designed instruction to any student during the first 45 minutes of the school day. Therefore, even if the complainant’s allegations of tardiness are correct, such tardiness would not have resulted in a failure to implement the two IEPs of the complainant’s children (or the IEP of any student) with respect to specially designed instruction.

The complainant also alleges that Teacher A’s child, who is a student at the school but who does not have a disability, frequently spent time in Teacher A’s classroom and caused disruptions. The complainant did not provide the district’s investigator with specific dates and times for the alleged disruptions and did explain how the complainant had found out about these alleged incidents. Evidence from the district indicates Teacher A’s child did occasionally come to Teacher A’s classroom during the school day, but such visits were brief. The evidence indicates the presence of Teacher A’s son in the classroom did not result in the two students being deprived of the specially designed instruction specified in their IEPs. The district properly implemented the students’ IEPs regarding the provision of specially designed instruction.

Provided special education using properly licensed staff.

Each school board must ensure every teacher, aide, or other professional staff holds a valid certificate, license, or permit issued by the department for the position for which the individual is employed. Special education services must be provided by properly licensed special education teachers. 34 CFR § 300.156; Wis. Stats § 118.19; Wis. Admin. Code § PI 34.

In February 2022, the district’s early childhood special education teacher left the district. A replacement teacher was hired and began on February 21, 2022. During the 2021-22 school year, the replacement teacher was licensed only in early childhood education, which was not a valid license for the position for which the teacher was hired. The district attempted to locate an appropriately licensed teacher but was unsuccessful due to the ongoing teacher shortage. The replacement teacher had no responsibilities related to the complainant’s children. The district has contacted the parents of other students on the teacher’s caseload and offered to have IEP team meetings to discuss whether compensatory services are necessary as a result of the teacher’s lack of an appropriate license. No further corrective action will be required as a result of this noncompliance.

This concludes our review of this complaint. This decision is final for the IDEA State Complaint process. These issues may be addressed through other dispute resolutions, including mediation and due process hearings. For more information, visit the department’s website at http://dpi.wi.gov/sped/dispute-resolution.This concludes our review of this complaint. This decision is final for the IDEA State Complaint process. These issues may be addressed through other dispute resolutions, including mediation and due process hearings. For more information, visit the department’s website at http://dpi.wi.gov/sped/dispute-resolution or contact the special education team at (608) 266-1781.