The complaint

A parent made a complaint about the difficulties she had experienced while trying to have her daughter’s new diagnosis of dyslexia included in her Individual Educational Plan (IEP). The process and engagement with the primary school took over six months and affected the relationship between the parent and the school to the extent that the parent felt it was necessary to remove her daughter and to have her educated at a different primary school.

OCO examination

During the examination of this complaint it became apparent that the Board of Management of the school and the Educational Psychologist from the National Educational Psychological Service (NEPS) had differing views on the role of the school in formulating IEPs for children with certain learning difficulties.

The NEPS Psychologist had written to the school to advise of their role. It appeared that the school were of the opinion, and had informed the parents, that it was NEPS’ role to put the IEP in place and to set targets for the child. NEPS clarified to the school that they may have a support role in this process, if requested, but that these roles were primarily for the class teacher, the Learning Support Teacher and should be done with input from parents, and the educational psychologist if required, as per the NCSE’s 2006 Guidelines on the Individual Education Plan Process.

Outcome

As a result of the Office’s intervention, the Board of Management agreed that they had responded to the complainant incorrectly with regard to the school’s function in the IEP formulation process for her child. The Board committed in future to include all relevant parties in the formulation of IEPs where appropriate. Although the child was no longer in the school and direct redress was not possible the Board committed to write to the complainant and clarify any previous misgivings it may have communicated to her regarding the school’s role in the process.

Posted in: Investigations Education