CASE NO. 2022060239
STUDENT v. BERKELEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Counsel for Student: Parent
Counsel for School District: David Mishook
Representative for School: Shawn Mansanger
ALJ: Sabrina Kong
Date of Decision: August 18, 2022
- Whether school’s psychoeducational assessment and academic assessment are appropriate?
FACTS OF THE CASE:
- Student was admitted in a school which was both an NPS and a private school.
- Parents claimed that he was admitted to an NPS, because he was entitled to special education. However, in fact he was parentally placed at the school and not through IEP.
- Student graduated and earned a regular high school diploma by the time of hearing.
- School conducted psychoeducational assessment and academic assessment on parent’s request. However, parents disagreed with assessment results and asked for re-assessment which was not required as per the School.
- School’s psychoeducational assessment and academic assessment WERE
– The School demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence it complied with all procedural aspects of proper notice, obtaining parental consent, and timelines regarding the assessments, and holding an IEP team meeting to discuss the assessment reports and results.
– The assessments were conducted in Student’s primary language by qualified and experienced professionals who were members of IEP meeting wherein it was decided to conduct the said assessments.
– for psychoeducational assessment, instruments chosen were designed to provide information about Student’s special education eligibility, related services, and accommodations based on Student’s academic, developmental, and functional capabilities.
– Parent was neither trained, knowledgeable, or experienced in administration, scoring, or interpreting psychoeducational and academic assessments nor was a credentialed educator.
- – School is not required to fund independent psychoeducation or academic assessments.