On Tuesdays here at the Daily Dawg we highlight The Toolbox—a full day training program focusing on maintaining safety while serving each student appropriately.  We spend a considerable amount of time in Toolbox training talking about behavioral interventions, supports and strategies for students with disabilities.  Now, we have a new DCL (Dear Colleague Letter) on this subject from the Department of Education to digest.

The letter is 16-pages and well worth perusal for special education directors, school psychologists, behavioral specialists and campus administrators.  If you don’t have time to review all 16 pages, D.O.E. has provided a two-page “Summary for Stakeholders.”

Here is what I derive from the DCL:

1. Suspensions don’t work.  They do not improve student performance or reduce inappropriate behaviors.  So we should impose an out-of-school suspension only when needed for safety purposes—not in the misguided belief that it will magically improve the student’s behavior.

2. We should be relying on “evidence based practices”—techniques that have a proven track record of success.

3. The key thing is for educators to “actively prevent the need for short term disciplinary consequences by effectively supporting and responding to behavior.”

4. Even when using the 10 “FAPE-Free Days” that the law permits, educators must keep in mind the main thing—which is whether or not the student’s behavior is being appropriately addressed.

All of this comes back to the basic question that ARD Committees must repeatedly ask themselves: does this student engage in behaviors that impede learning of the student or others?  If the answer is YES, then the Committee must consider positive interventions, strategies and supports to address the student’s behavior. The law requires that this question be answered at the annual ARDC meeting for each student. The DCL is a good reminder to ask that question at other times as well.

To put this in Toolbox terms, consider: you used Tool #5—a “Special Circumstances” removal—because the student was in possession of drugs or a weapon at school.  That would be a good time to ask the question again: is this a behavior that is impeding learning?

Or you use Tool #7: the 10-day FAPE-Free Zone. Suppose that you suspend a student more than once for the same behavior. Even though you have the authority to do this, isn’t this another indication that maybe we are seeing a behavior that impedes learning?

D.O.E. classifies this letter as “Significant Guidance.” This means that it is not legally binding and does not impose or create new legal requirements. But it is “significant” and thus will be addressed in future Toolbox presentations. The letter was issued August 1, 2016 and can be found at:

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/school-discipline/files/dcl-on-pbis-in-ieps-08-01-2016.pdf.

If you are interested in having the Toolbox brought to your district or ESC, let me hear from you.  I’m at jwalsh@wabsa.com.

DAWG BONE:  THE MAIN THING IS TO KEEP THE MAIN THING THE MAIN THING.  THE MAIN THING IS TO MAKE SURE THAT BEHAVIOR DOES NOT GET IN THE WAY OF LEARNING.

File this one under: SPECIAL EDUCATION DISCIPLINE

Tomorrow: Board members texting each other. Problem?