and long standing history of academic failures and its history of serious and explosive behaviors which resulted multi player multiple disciplinary referrals suspensions and long term disciplinary removal no sense to me a remove need to help me because the existence of an i e p means that he has received at least one service and available to other students can you help with that he's the poster receive at least one service that is not available to other students power in this case the only service chris received specifically was fifteen minutes of console time of her six weeks the special education case manager said she use that fifteen minutes per six weeks to me only check his grades and report on his status that is not specially designed instruction as the id defines it essence of special education especially is specially designed instruction to meet the charles you need any of that result in the child's the ability on the record we have we show that well under based on his evaluations your honor he was anywhere between five and six years below his grade level in reading he was also several raid levels below his level in mathematics i don't know that chris would necessarily require a one on one aide or one on one assistance however he did require individualized instruction to address his reading deficit in his math i was not our committee obviously so i don't know that he was to get thirty minutes of one on one at reading instruction or weight or if he was going to get a small group instruction to specifically target his reading disability but in this case he received nothing other than general education accommodations which are available to all students and can never see a plan individualized instruction although they might be used to support individualized instruction well i don't think every student up at fifteen i'm not i understand you think that they needed more but that fifteen minute thing is an individual lies isn't it isn't it again if individualized monitoring it is not individualized instruction right but the monitoring itself is something that he got that the other students didn't write that's correct ok if there wasn't anything done in two thousand and nine that indicated that k s had a disability was getting worse and worse every year there was testimony that the parent was very cooperated and was screaming to the high have ends that chris was having difficulties and needed martha stands however the district never took steps to evaluate him or provide  hour the district court erred in finding that the child find obligation is triggered under three entirely different circumstances st and the parent expresses concern in writing if the parent requests an evaluation and if the school expresses the concerns about the child things are we a recent post is that because he's not a minor or are we supposed to be using his name we want to respect since you're right he is now an adult and i did check with him in using his st name is ok with him ok could you tell us what relief you're specifically seeking there was testimony during the hearing about chris required individualized tutoring for reading in mathematics and in addition to the individualized tutoring because of his behavior is he was going to require some vocational coaching and transitional living services so for chris what he wants than what he's asked for is that they teach him so he would require some tutoring in reading consists bills or significantly low functioning level and for mathematics based mathematics bills in addition to being provided with a patient coach and vocational counseling and that's done after graduation routinely it's part of the provisions of the op let you yes ma'am that is correct the school district can either provide those services that more often than not for its will ask them to find it and the parent will find the it and those have been asked for and declined yes ma'am specifically those future service have been exploited declined they were asked for during the their hearing and shortly thereafter as this case worked its way at that he'd be provided i can't remember specifically on the vocational services but certainly on the private tutoring services for math and reading well that's kind of my question if if that kind of involved as the case progressed are those actually part of the complaint or would that be a new proceeding that he's not getting the services he needs now and this case here is about the services you didn't get in the past and i'm confused on that well the remedy remedy is under the i v a are compensated child for services they should have received but did not receive so we're asking that the services he did not receive in th th grade before we had the hearing be compensated through private tutoring and through these locations so this is just a remedy you're seeking this is not a complaint that he was should have gotten these after graduation services and didn't get them that is not right for us that's correct ok do you have seven minutes and you're on  underpinning of id a is to turn the key stakeholders parents and the students into advocates indeed the success of i b a can be attributed to that focus on increasing participation and the development and design of an individualized to participate and deprive him of educational militants and nd the district's failure to provide k s with appropriate transition services we can't hear you mr duke we still can't hear you mr do backstop it's time so it's not expiring please mr dick let's see if we can hear you you address if we agree with you that he was denied his right to be just a paid does that mean we reversed this case or is there's no i guess we should ask point in what i would have been and with that i'll turn to now is that here we've seen a series of procedural violations on the supreme court imposed by the importance of compliance with a v i d s procedures and room courts are supposed to do more than just make sure that the district checks certain boxes and you're after the supreme court explicitly rejected the argument that the procedure was on or not substantive rules and in fact the judge roberts that that it it's not i thought everybody agreed that it was so then the question is as it actionable right don't we have to take a further step once we say it's procedural problem then we we have to figure out whether its actions were the right but that's correct in the determination that the court was supposed to apply was understand it was excluded in a sensible everyone agrees it should have been but can we look at what actually happened during the i mean the parents were there right now for a look at the substance of what actually got done and discussed or the proceeding you know didn't adequately consider what it should have done i'm trying to figure out how we make the nd step well i think what the nd standard is we're going to find the language because the court was reckoned below in describing this anger it's whether or not the conversation provide more explanation but also understand the process and as we detail students who are invited to that process one have more buy in understand the basi lone was sufficient to show that there would have been an impact we think it's clear that modern clued in the student who had a right to produce also meets that standard educational process to make sure that the procedure violations are addressed and how they would be addressed is either the release stuck on the point of or further proceedings during the administrative process this were these file and episodes included as part of the then also the parent provided a doctor's note which indicated name or numerous other mental health ability and then the district itself was aware because he was a student and their school dish for example here in new york they make efforts to accommodate might want to answer that question if you just like any any steps to it's obviously they knew about it from the mall regardless of whether they had that report and they knew about it from the server the nom class and not turning in work and those twenty six dollars referrals dropped the next year after they implemented his i e and it went from twenty six dollars referrals to two referrals and so once the district implemented e the supports in the services that were put in place for k s had an impact on his behavior which is the th michael f factor when we're looking at whether we provided him with academic and nonacademic benefit going from twenty six referrals during th grade to two referrals during th grade is the epitome of nonacademic benefit and that's exactly what a school district wants to see when they implement an i e q for a student and so when you also look they also completed an f d a which is a functional behavioral assessment during two thousand and seventeen and when you look at the f d a that was conducted by diagnostician and debbie total and it's in the record it shows that  did the f b i he only had to disciplinary referrals one was for excessive tardies and the other was for inappropriate language chaos as teachers at that time were reporting it was having some difficulty with attention to task but he was responding wel redirection and they reported many positive behaviors such as he was a good student he was personable he was doing well he was good natured he was asking questions when he didn't understand something and so these behavioral issues that k s points out just were not education teacher actually testified that she spent more than fifteen weeks or for more than fifteen minutes i apologize person interacting with his general education teachers and that included monitoring this progress checking his grades speaking with his teachers and ensuring that his needs were met general education students don't have access to somebody that standing over them making sure that they're getting their work turned in making sure that their grades are where they need to be monitoring their progress as judge pointed out that doesn't exist for general education students who he absolutely was receiving and services that general education students do not receive but more importantly when you look at his it absolutely contain specialized instruction in their opening brief at appellant actually said that k s is i e he contain general accommodations that may have adapted the content or delivery of instruction provided to k s that was on page thirty three dollars that's the definition of specially earth special education under the id a it's specially designed instruction that adopts the content methodology or delivery of instruction to address a student's unique needs so when you look at his accommodations that were in his eye e p and they absolutely adopted the delivery of instruction they adopted the content of instruction for instance and his math teacher was to change the pace of instruction for k s one of cancer's disabilities under his specific learning disability was  need for math and his math teacher was it's not something general education students are going to get his science teacher was clarifying and rewording complex questions and concepts as well as clarifying co text and questions again adapting the content of instruction and adapting the delivery of instruction and then the mere fact that he had goals to address the teak swear he was lacking and where he needed help that's the individualized nature of his  and you can look at the record and it shows that it there were they were based on his present levels of performance they had input from his teachers they had input from his parents k s attended his art committee meetings he gave input on his ip and so we absolutely favor chris and also the you know i'm concerned that the factors may favor us so when you look at rene j one thing the court needs to take into account is that the student brain a j had autism and intellectual disability with an i q of fifty one dollars eighty eight cents here k s was receiving and i e p and special education under the idea as a student with a specific learning disability the transition services that a student with a specific learning disability is going to need is going to differ greatly from the transition needs st dealing with an intellectual disability or a student with autism and the student and rene j had both and so while they were providing that student and with with transition services that fit what she wanted to do they were also providing other services and the student was in a life skills class there's no evidence in this case that k s needed a life skills class he was a student with a specific learning disability and so then what you have to look at is what does the idea require for a transition plan and when you look at it has to have appropriate and measurable transition goals there's no dispute in this case that his goals were measurable and the evidence in the record on appeal also shows that they were appropriate and they aligned with his interests they provided him a path to pursue employment and his i v p contained the high school courses and the accommodations and the goals he needed to meet those goals which were to attend an institution of higher learning to pursue a degree in criminal justice and to seek employment as a game warden he was also enrolled in a law enforcement class he was unrolled in a wildlife fish and ecosystems class so they were giving them what individual lines things were e his goals for instance he needed he was not there were certain teeth that he was needing help on and in order to pass and of course exams which are required to graduate from high school which was one of his goals he needed to ensure that he knew the team and his goals were tailored to that to ensure that he was receiving the services he needed to match his take so that's absolutely individualized to help him meet his goals graduating from high school attending college and pursuing a degree what is very concerning to me in this record is that he was going to complete all of these course where to graduate after only five days in the alternative school  about that issue in the district the opinion is not before the court because his receipt of a favor at the d a p was not an issue before the hearing officer and the nd it in the nd hearing the only issue before the hearing officer in the nd hearing was whether the district complied with the ideas requirements regarding the manifestation determination or a view absolutely and he was not he was not really behind in reading when you look at the evidence in the record on a keel there's there's testimony from the and i want to find it because i want to make sure that i provided to the court there is as there was testimony from the diagnostician barry morgan explaining that the fact that k s was able to pass his star tests and showed that he was absolutely on grade level we do not deny that it took him a couple of tries to pass english one in english two but the fact that he was able to pass in english to show that he had the skills necessary to be on grade level and to graduate from high school and there's a difference between norm reference test which provide great equivalency scores which is what and k s is experts pointing to as opposed to start exams which are criterion referenced assessments which reflect explanation as to why the district disagrees that he's not on grade level so yes he absolutely had the skills necessary to and complete his coursework can you address if there should be a remedy for the failure to allow you to be in the meeting there absolutely should not be because an as i believe judge junction duncan was pointing out you have to have a procedural viral lation in order to be needs one if three things you have to have impeded his right to a free appropriate public education you had to have impeded his opportunity to participate in the provision of a faith or you had to cause a deprivation of educational benefits also meant to the court that the only issue and k s breach for the court was the nd one whether it significantly impeded his opportunity to participate in the provision of a free appropriate hillock education yes my question was if everyone's agreeing that he should  for the record reflects that he participated and in decisions affecting his provision of fame which included providing consent for additional evaluations being present for the discussion regarding early graduation being present and to discuss the credits he needed to proceed accordingly and he also participated in prior art committee meetings which impacted his i e p and the provision of faith and he was able to voice and did in fact object to the manifestation decision reached at the to your point is whether it significantly impeded his opportunity to participate in the decision making process regarding the provision of a free appropriate public education and our position is is that he has an exhausted his provision of faith at the e p and even if it was exhausted the idea require school districts to continue providing students assigned to it with the faith in accordance with their ip and nobody is disputing that is i e p could not be implemented at the the only change was that instead of being in the general education environment at resul high school he would be in the general education environment at the da e p his placement did not change his transition plan did not change his i did not change t are simply determined that instead of receiving his services at the high school he was going to receive the services at the peak that does not significantly impede the provision of a faith to him th just to state that what k s was showing with twenty six referrals regarding refusing to do work and being tardy to class is not does not give rise to a suspicion of a disability as well as a suspicion for a need for special education at most it shows that he was even gauging in delinquent behavior which doesn't get a school district on notice that's the tracy case out of the district of south carolina and then when there was the mothers that he's  emotional problems and there was the one incident we were the violent earth the violent outburst occurred shortly before or shortly after i'm not sure which i need to look and he was referred it was within a reasonable time frame of him being referred for special education the motional problem to me oh no you know we may not have known in the past but now we know that all these emotional growth can be were academic and i don't believe that dave i don't believe that they've just pointed in the record where mom was raising all of these emotional issues what they're arguing is that the star scores and his grades triggered child find that his behavior triggered child fine but all of the evidence in the record on appeal shows that his teachers were reporting that he was functioning in the classroom just like any other student and then with respect to his star scores they were inconsistent at best where he was passing classes but then maybe failing a star test or failing us are passing a star test but not applying himself in class and that's just simply not enough to trigger a child fine when you have to have a suspicion of a disability and a suspicion of a need for specially designed to instruction so for those reasons the district would ask that the court uphold the district court's decision finding that the district and hear these specially designed instruction the court erred in fighting that chris's general education commendation adapted the delivery of instruction because changing the pace of instruction as well as rewording was considered and in individualized instruction basically what that says there's a st rate loses hand in class and has asked the question are asked for clarification then that would be considered individualized instruction when it's not adapting the delivery of instruction under the i means to provide the student with delivery at that abject adaptations a general education students don't have access to for example or student hi chris to read below grade level due to his disability perhaps this guy this teacher would give him reading materials at his instructional level so that his reading disability doesn't negatively impact his access to science read wording if he asked the question in the middle of class is not specialized instruction confusing result providing specialized instruction the court would essentially permit result is circumvent the purpose of the id a i socialize promoting christa to mainstream curriculum without addressing the individualized needs of his respective disabilities which defeats the entire purpose of the to standardized testing results numerous courts have held that standardized testing results because they measure stills and not curriculum are appropriate measures for determining if a student did make progress o progress the same can be said for his math problem solving he went from a ninety one in february to an eighty six in these me in ninety one in may and eighty six in february and then in eighty four when dr d