Disciplining Students with Disabilities: Legal Trends and the Issue of Interim Alternative Education Settings:

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a monumental legislative effort to ensure that all qualified students with disabilities receive a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. The 1997 amendments to this legislation (IDEA '97) addressed disciplinary procedures to ensure that (a) schools provide for safe and orderly learning environments, (b) school personnel are empowered to prevent and address problem behaviors, (c) there is a balance between the need for safety and the need to preserve the rights of students with disabilities, and (d) students with disabilities are afforded an appropriate education that includes effective behavioral intervention plans (Office of Special Education Programs [OSEP], 1997; Yell, Katsiyannis, Bradley, & Rozalski, 2000).The disciplinary provisions outlined in IDEA '97 generally codified guidelines established by the courts, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR), and OSEP. These provisions also included specific technologies such as functional behavioral assessment, implementation guidelines for provisions such as manifestation determination hearings, and specific criteria for governing placements such as interim alternative educational settings. These provisions have been heralded as both positive and influential steps for disciplining students with disabilities despite being subject to controversy and perhaps the potential for abuse (Conroy, Clark, Fox, & Gable, 2000; Conroy, Katsiyannis, Clark, Gable, & Fox, in press; Hartwig, & Ruesch, 2000; Katsiyannis & Maag, 1998, 2001; Sasso, Conroy, Stichter, & Fox, 2001; Yell et al., 2000). Of particular interest is the use of homebound settings, almost routinely as an interim alternative educational setting for disciplinary purposes. This practice, however, may have adverse implications because such a placement may be an unjustifiably restrictive setting and inherent limitations may be a barrier in addressing individual needs.Smith (2000) reported an analysis of 89 state-level hearings, OCR rulings, and court decisions during the first 18 months of the implementation of IDEA '97 (June 1997 to December 1998). These decisions included 123 separate issues associated with disciplining students with disabilities. Team decisions in relation to the discipline provisions of IDEA '97 were supported the least in functional assessment (10 cases; 10% support rate), followed by the adequacy of program planning in the behavioral area (78 cases; 26% support rate) and support for interim educational program decision making (12 cases; 33% support rate). In contrast, 57% of the decisions regarding manifestation determination were supported (23 cases) (Smith, 2000). This early review of situations in which individualized education program (IEP) team competencies in the application of the discipline requirements of IDEA '97 were challenged suggests that significant staff development needs exist among those charged with implementing such requirements.This article (a) summarizes legal activity regarding IDEA'S disciplinary provisions since January of 1999 and (b) discusses issues associated with interim alternative educational settings. In discussing the use of interim alternative educational settings, we place the issue of homebound settings in context by examining its traditional use, particularly in relationship to disciplinary exclusions.MethodSearch ProceduresThe first author examined due process hearings, OCR decisions, court decisions, and OSEP memoranda/policy letters related to IDEA'S disciplinary decisions. This process involved a manual review of cases included in the Special Educator (an LRP Publications periodical published twice a month) from January 1999 to November 2002. This publication provides brief overviews of legal activity in special education by reporting decisions rendered.AnalysesCases were recorded on a spreadsheet by Special Educator volume and issue, Special Educator short title, primary issue, prevailing party (i. …