somebody comes at sixteen years of age and there are other credit you would give them their school of choice you would need to give them the opportunity to go to phoenix or to be international school at mccaskey correct yes your honor and in fact th fact that the students are widely differing ages and maturity levels from the thirteen year old fourteen year old coming in from middle school to be possibly twenty twenty one year old getting their degree in an with younger students and that you know ryan might you know why am i in this in this classroom with all these young kids you know it's discouraging and it was testimony on that fact from the educators that quite say i don't want to be a very young kids i want to go to phoenix they could say foundation of english language forgive me if i'm wrong but i don't recall that part of the record where they said what middle school students were being educated with i said twenty one year old students not saying that you're incorrect objection you know at the final hearing when the when you get an expert maybe or you can develop a record before but when you do things in such a compressed time frame you've got to be able nobody can put together the kind of record they want to put together more than anything is that we are required to take these things from the beginning in college you know in contravention of the board but the board feels is in the best interest of the school district and students essentially asking us to grade the evidence and do and make factual findings we will not do so because clearly there are it is reserved for finance completely devoid of minimum adventurous support displaying some fewer of credibility that's discovery we had five days of trial with fifteen witnesses an expert witness you've got two thousand pages of our record here to support but judge smith found it is difficult for students who don't speak the language sure you know rebels to be able to understand what's going on and said ok let me ask your question on the statute itself whether or not the school district is providing a program that is salads and effective in coming students language barriers and in this case the evidence that justice found and those are factual district presented to judge smith who weighed them all and determines that in fact based on what the students testified with the teacher testified teachers testified the sc wish language were so the same the same exact education that for some students it's not going to work for others because they have a particular form of this bubble and in this case that is the fact that these students don't speak school districts and helix is not working there is an easy solution here because the district already has a school that is appropriate for this group of individuals it's an option that should have been left to the district and it's not it not in argument i would suggest that that determination by the judge is subject to abuse of discretion standard and it is possible that down the road but the school district of write history may come up with some other solution this is wrong that enabled the school district to satisfy its obligations it seems like the one that is the least intrusive because all the really said is he got it to keep these kids regardless it's not working in this building take them down the mccaskey you have an argument here the case is going to have an argument and then i think the district would have to design some kind of that's all that state rob violation pertained to was that they weren't enrolling them within a five day period required by state law how does that relate to that there being a pending motion for classification of the iran issue  in emergency motion which i believe was denied on class certification i don't think it's still pending i again i'm not one hundred percent sure on that but that's my understanding of what has heard as happened in the lower court down in exceptions like capab now your honor there are receiving an education at this point and i'm just going based on the language of what the court said is the issues and stood and that's what this record said and that we believe that the record shows that the district is going to comply with the norm requirements going forward i just want to also touch upon be accelerated issued a very there is a lot of confusion about accelerating going quicker going quicker and the record clearly is that this is a program effects that when evaluated every year by expert consultants the record shows that and that d p t p e the pennsylvania department of education is also reviewing this program evaluating year by year burden which we believe that the district court disregarded because they were asking for a mandatory really three want just asking you know for a plan here junction to stop doing something they were asking for mandatory things kids can put into another school that's a very heavy burden an