Opinion ID: 732384
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Class Representatives

Text: 14 When Tina Williams was in the second grade, her mother requested an evaluation. Tina was referred for a non-Chapter 36 assessment, but Parents and Students contend that her mother was not informed of the fact that Tina would not receive a comprehensive evaluation. After Tina was given the non-Chapter 36 test, her mother was informed that Tina did not qualify for special education. Parents and Students maintain that she was not given notice of her right to challenge the test results. 15 Subsequently, Tina's mother arranged for an independent psychological and educational evaluation. The results of the evaluation indicated that Tina had a number of problems, among them difficulties with hearing and comprehension. Tina's mother then requested another evaluation. The form on which she made her request was designated as a Non-Department of Education Evaluation Request. The DOE, however, responded to the request by performing a comprehensive evaluation, and found Tina to have a Specific Learning Disability (SLD) and to be eligible for special education.
16 In May 1990, Ramsey Pasatiempo, a first grade regular student, was given a non-Chapter 36 assessment in response to a school referral. The reasons given for the referral included Ramsey's hyperactivity, inattentiveness, and difficulty understanding instructions. The school completed a Referral for Special Services form, but there is no indication that Ramsey's parents consented to the administration of the non-Chapter 36 test. After administering the evaluation, the DOE concluded that because Ramsey was performing at the first grade level ... no further testing was warranted. 17 Later, on November 30, 1992, Ramsey's parents requested an evaluation; like the Williams' form, it too was designated as a Non-Department of Education Evaluation Request. Nonetheless, on December 11, 1992, his parents were informed by the DOE that he was to be given a comprehensive special education evaluation.
18 On or about May 23, 1990, Peter Ferreira, a first grade regular education student, was referred by his school to a screening committee, and was later referred to the District's Special Services team for a non-Chapter 36 assessment. On May 24, 1990, the Special Services team informed the principal of Peter's school that because Peter was performing at his current grade level, a non-Chapter 36 assessment was not warranted. However, Parents and Students contend that Peter had already been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a potentially disabling condition under § 504. See Farmington Public Schools, 17 E.H.L.R. 872, 874 (1991) (students with ADHD must be evaluated to determine their eligibility for special education and related services under § 504). 19 On September 5, 1991, Peter's mother sought an evaluation; however, she rescinded her request on September 11, 1991. On March 3, 1993, she again requested an evaluation, noting on her request form that Peter had been diagnosed with ADHD. She received from the DOE two different responses: On March 12, she received a Notice of Special Evaluation that informed her that Peter was to be tested for academic abilities, but did not indicate the type of evaluation that was to be given or notify her of the fact that she could challenge its results. Seven days later, she received a form which indicated that an initial evaluation, or a comprehensive test, would not be administered. On June 9, 1993, she again requested an evaluation. The DOE then agreed to administer a comprehensive assessment.