Uncategorized

IEP’s & 504’s What’s the Difference?

​Do you know the difference between a 504 Plan and an IEP?

It’s fine if you don’t, but in case these are relevant to you, here’s a basic primer.

504 Plans

• 504’s only provide accommodations, not direct services. The provision of extra time is a classic accommodation given. There are about five other typical accommodations offered in most 504’s.
• To obtain a 504, the child needs a diagnosis of a disability stated on letterhead by a medical practitioner (e.g., physician or psychologist).
• Once you have the diagnosis on letterhead, 504’s are not usually that difficult to obtain.
• The majority of children receiving 504 plans are those who have been diagnosed with ADHD.
• 504’s are reviewed annually.

IEP (Individualized Education Plan)

• To obtain an IEP the child is deemed to be classifiable under the special education categories governed by federal law. There are 13 special education categories based on Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA. The categories are interpreted somewhat differently depending on the state you reside.
• IEP’s are generated by the district’s special education team. An outside evaluation (e.g., a psychological or neuropsychological) may offer a diagnosis, but the school’s team needs to come to its own conclusions based on their assessments.
• The vast majority of children with IEP’s fall under the classification of Specific Learning Disability (SLD).
• Compared to the relative ease of obtaining a 504, the IEP process can be lengthy and complex.
• Different than a 504, with an IEP the child receives some level of direct service (remediation), along with accommodations.

Takeaway Point

Of course, there’s a lot more to it than what is indicated above, but these points will get you started.

​

The following quote is from the Foreword of The Shut-Down Learner: Helping Your Academically Discouraged Child. I have always loved this quote and feel that it timelessly captures the impact that school struggling has upon the child and the family.

“I have been a practicing general pediatrician for more than thirty years and in the course of that time have gained some understanding of children.  Every child is different.  Every child has their own personality, temperament, strength, and cultural background.  I know that children love to learn and look forward to different learning experiences.  When things are going well, they love to go to school.  If a child in kindergarten or first grade is not enjoying school, this is a problem that needs further investigation immediately.

The work of childhood is navigating the waters of school.  For many reasons, not all children do well in school.  When children struggle in school, their whole family system is affected.  From my perspective as a pediatrician, the child’s health is affected by their negative school experiences.  Increased incidents of depression, anxiety, and family turmoil are the common side effects of school struggling.  By the time the child is in their teens, it is often too late to break the downward spiral.”

(William Sharrar, Professor of Pediatrics, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School)

Most of you understand the concept of standard error of measurement (SEM).

In a nutshell, SEM tells us that on any given day that you can be within an interval of confidence that an obtained score is accurate.

For example, if the obtained IQ score is 100, you can have about 99% confidence that with repeated administrations the score would fall within a range, say between 95 – 105.

For standardized tests such as the WISC-V (the gold standard cognitive measure used in special education assessments), there is no such thing as a “true score” as there is always the standard error of measurement to consider.

That explains the fury when a parent was told that her clearly struggling child was not eligible to receive services because the child missed eligibility by one point.

This is what occurred with 10-year-old, fourth- grader, Charles,  who has been struggling greatly with his reading, spelling and writing since kindergarten.  Some months before his special education assessment, I  had conducted a dyslexia screening with Charles,  which showed clear indicators of concern.

The school conducted a comprehensive special education evaluation that also identified significant issues with word identification, phonemic awareness, reading fluency, spelling and writing, which are the typical academic indicators for a learning disability, such as dyslexia.

When the school met with the mother to review the findings, stunningly she was told that the child was ineligible for services. That is, he would not be classified as eligible for an IEP.

As told to the mom, Charles fell short by one point, which did not meet the very strict standards of the discrepancy model utilized to determine eligibility.

Along with a few other states in the country,  New Jersey uses and outmoded model that often leaves children like Charles struggling without any support or direct remediation.

This model requires there be a statistically significant difference between the child’s Full-Scale IQ and an overall score in reading.

When a pure quantitative discrepancy model is used, as it is in New Jersey, many kids are left completely in the lurch.

In an article written by Emerson Dickman, a special education attorney and former president of the International Dyslexia Association, he quoted leading experts regarding the use of a discrepancy model.

Here are a few choice ones:

“For 25 years we have used  the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, a wait-to-fail model that is known to be ineffective, inefficient, irrational, immoral and indefensible.”  (Dr. Douglas Carmine presentation during testimony to Congress on reauthorization of IDEA.)

“The formula is a “wait and fail” model and is immoral.”  (Dr. Thomas Hehir, Director of Special Education Programs during Clinton Presidency.)

“IQ-Achievement discrepancy is not a valid means for identifying individuals with learning disabilities Robert Pasternack, Assistant Secretary for Office of Special Education)

Not only is the model unfair and immoral often offering no support to struggling children,  it also leaves everything entirely up to parents to try and find outside services like tutoring that are never covered by insurance.

Basically, the unstated message given to parents  with a struggling ineligible child is something like this, “Sorry, we’re done.  Maybe you should talk to your pediatrician.”

As you can imagine, this is infuriating to parents.

(In next week’s post, we will elaborate on this point.)

Feel free to make comment below. 

To receive future blog posts, register your email: https://shutdownlearner.com.

To Contact Dr. Richard Selznick for advice, consultation or other information, email: shutdownlearner1@gmail.com. 

Copyright, Richard Selznick, Ph.D.  2023, www.shutdownlearner.com.