Michelle,
All states (to the best of my knowledge) have some version of "state curricular standards." These are different than methodology; they are goals or topics/skills that should be covered by grade.
Here is an important distinction that is in an evolutionary process. Previously, the Supreme Court ruled that parents of Special Education students do NOT have any right to dictate methods of instruction, granting what is referred to as "due deference" to professional expertise in these matters. The only exception to this was in NY state, where there was a circuit court decision that requires SDs to use discrete trial training for students with autism because it is "researched based," and it works. I feel like I am lecturing in Legal Issues 410, but hang on, this is on point to your situation:
As you probably know, Rowley (1982) prohibits parents from seeking "the best" special education services. Special Education students are only entitled to "appropriate" services. HOWEVER, MI is one of the four states that exceeds the "appropriate" service level, but I still would not ask for "the best" for strategic reasons. Enter NCLB which requires "researched based" instruction and uses "excellence" and "maximize" language. This leaves a weird situation in that IDEA uses one standard (appropriate) and NCLB (excellence) has another. However, ALL children are covered by NCLB so presumably, Special Education students are now entitled to more than "appropriate." HOWEVER, (isn't this about the fifth "however,") the degree to which parents of regular ed students ever got any changes enacted because the school was not using "research based methods" is unclear to me.
What does this mean for you? Here is my opinion: Do not go in and say, "I want the Linda Mood Bell program," because the SD will say that you cannot dictate methodology. Instead, DEMAND progress accountability in that you will have to use their reading program FIRST, but if after 6 to 8 weeks, there is no PROGRESS, then you have a right to insist that they change to an "effective method." Again, you can't dictate what that will be, but you can demand a change. One of the biggest mistakes parents make is to think that whatever is in the IEP is "set" for a year. A good negotiating strategy in my opinion is to agree with the SD, and then set a meeting to REVIEW EFFECTIVENESS DATA in 6 to 8 weeks. Make it clear at the outset that you expect results, and there will be follow-up if there are no positive outcomes with their method. This approach is supported by the Supreme Court's Carter decision (1995.) Implicit in this is the SD has an obligation to collect objective data to show gain or lack there of. If they refuse, then they have nothing to stand on, greatly increasing your chances of winning with a mediator or at Due Process.
This approach is in line with current trends in two ways: even though the NYC School Board lost in the Supreme Court last fall, there is still the idea floating around that parents should have to try the school's suggestions first; second, RtI focuses on research based, effective instruction, particularly in reading. RtI EMPHASIZES data-based decision making in regard to both curriculum and BIPs. At the risk of repeating myself, ALL of these legal mandates are underwritten by the assumption that a lot of data will be collected.
So as a strategy, I would not attempt to insist on a particular methodology because that has little to no basis in law. I WOULD insist on demonstrable research based RESULTS because both NCLB and IDEA provide a legal basis for that as well as the Carter decision.
I hope my reasoning is clear; if not, ask questions and I will attempt to answer them.
Martie
