vs. ) CASE NO. 80-267E
Respondent. )
Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, R.L. Caleen, Jr., held a formal hearing in this case on April 7, 1980, in Miami, Florida.
For Petitioners: Mrs. A. B., pro se
For Respondents: Michael J. Neimand, Esquire
Jesse J. McCrary, Jr., Esquire 3050 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 300
Whether I.B., daughter of Petitioners, meets the criteria for placement in an educational alternative program designated for students who are disruptive or unsuccessful in a normal school environment.
While at Filer Junior High School, I.B. has been a disruptive, unsuccessful, and disinterested student and meets the criteria for placement in an educational alternative program.
Accordingly, the School Board should uphold the placement of this student in the Jan Mann Opportunity School educational alternative program and deny the appeal of such placement by Petitioners.
By letter dated January 28, 1980, Petitioners objected to the Respondent School Board of Dade County's ("School Board") assignment of their daughter, I.B., to an educational alternative program located at Jan Mann Opportunity School, and requested a hearing.
On February 13, 1980, the School Board requested that a hearing officer be assigned to conduct a hearing as requested by Petitioners.
By Notice of Hearing, dated March 19, 1980, a hearing was set for April 7, 1980. At hearing, Mrs. A.B. testified on her own behalf, and called E.B. and I.B. as Petitioners' witnesses. The School Board called Eliot M. Berman as its only witness, and offered Respondent's Exhibits 1 and 2 (Composite) which were admitted into evidence.
Based upon the evidence presented at hearing, the following facts are determined:
I.B. ("student"), daughter of Petitioners, was a seventh grade student attending Henry H. Filer Junior High Community School prior to placement (which is here being challenged) in the educational alternative program located at Jan Mann Opportunity School. (Testimony of Eliot M. Berman)
Between September 4, and December 30, 1979, the student engaged in frequent behavior at Filer Junior High which disrupted the classroom environment. Specific instances of reported disruptive behavior occurred on or about September 5, 27, October 5, 9, 10, 11, November 29, December 3, 10, and 30, 1979. Usually her behavior involved physical or verbal hostility toward her teachers and other students. Each incident was followed by conferences with the student's parents, vice principal, or guidance counselor. Between September 5, 1979, and December 30, 1979, 9 parental and 8 counselor conferences were held in an effort to modify the student's disruptive behavior pattern.
The student is an aggressive child who becomes easily frustrated in a regular classroom environment, frequently rebels against authority, exhibits hostility toward and argues with her peers and engages in disruptive behavior in order to get attention. Several of her teachers have concluded that she is unwilling, or unable to adapt to a regular classroom environment. (Testimony of Eliot Berman, Respondent's Exhibits 1-2)
Due to her disruptive behavior in the school environment, the student was twice placed for several days in the Filer Junior High School's Center for Special Instruction (SCSI)-on October 9, 1979, for disruptive behavior during exchange of classes and inflammatory comments to the instructor, and on November 30, 1979, for slapping a female student in Physical Education class.
A child is placed in SCSI, in lieu of suspension from school, in order to receive special teacher instruction and supervision. The teacher-student ratio is increased to one teacher for each fifteen students, and a concentrated effort is made to modify a child's unsatisfactory behavior patterns and clarify his or her values. In this case, the student's placement in SCSI does not appear to have modified her disruptive behavior in the normal classroom setting. Her behavior not only detracts from her own learning experience, but interferes with the educational process of other children. (Testimony of Eliot Berman, Respondent's Exhibits 1-2)
The student was frequently absent from her classrooms between August 27, 1979, and January 23, 1980. She missed Social Studies class-19 times, Mathematics and Language Arts classes-7 times each, and Life Science class-11 times. Such absences, in combination with her behavior problems, have seriously impaired her academic progress. (Testimony of Eliot Berman, Respondent's Exhibits 1-2)
The student, in conjunction with her SCSI placement, has made a conscious effort to improve her behavior, but her disruptive classroom behavior has continued. (Respondent's Exhibits 1-2)
The student's mother and brother believe that placement in the Jan Mann Opportunity School educational alternative program will not benefit the student and that she should, instead, be placed in a regular junior high school close to her home where her behavior can be more closely monitored by family members. The student does not share in her family's desire that she be placed
in a regular school closer to her home. (Testimony of Mrs. A.B., E.B., and I.B.)
Placement of the student in the Jan Mann Opportunity School educational alternative program will provide the student with an opportunity for intensive counseling, a better student- teacher ratio, and an opportunity to improve her self-esteem and basic educational skills which cannot be provided in the regular classroom setting. (Eliot M. Berman)
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this proceeding. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes (1979).
Since the Respondent School Board seeks to place the student in a special classification, viz., an educational alternative program, the burden is upon the Board to show, by a preponderance of evidence, that such placement of the student is justified by the facts and consistent with applicable law. Balino
v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 348 So. 2d
349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
Section 230.2315, Florida Statutes (1979) requires each district school beard to establish one or more educational alternative programs which are designated "to meet the needs of students who are disruptive or unsuccessful in a normal school environment. Id.
Students are eligible for placement in such special programs
". . . if the student is disruptive, unsuccessful, or disinterested in the regular school environment as determined by grades, achievement test scores, referrals for suspension or other
disciplinary action, and rate of absences." Section 230.2315(4), supra.
Parents and guardians are entitled to a Section 120.57, supra, hearing, if requested, to review the school board's placement of their children in such alternative programs. Section 230.2315(5), supra.
Implementing rules of the State Board of Education provide further definition of these statutory eligibility criteria for placement in educational alternative programs:
6A-1.994
(2) (a) Disruptive. A student who:
Displays persistent behavior which interferes with the student's own learning or the educational process of others and requires attention and assistance beyond that which the traditional program can provide; or
Displays consistent behavior resulting in frequent conflicts of a disruptive
nature while the student is under the jurisdiction of the school either in or out of the classroom; or
Displays disruptive behavior which severely threatens the general welfare of the student or other members of the school population.
(b) Unsuccessful or disinterested. A student who:
Demonstrates a lack of sufficient involvement in the traditional school program to achieve success because interests, needs or talents are not being addressed; or
Shows unsatisfactory academic progress and the effort to provide assistance is either rejected or is ineffective.
(Emphasis supplied)
The School Board has established, by a preponderance of the evidence presented, that I.B., daughter of Petitioners, has been a disruptive, unsuccessful, and disinterested student while at Filer Junior High School, and that she satisfies the eligibility standards for placement in an educational alternative program as provided by Section 230.2315(4), Florida Statutes (1979), and Rule 6A-1.994, Florida Administrative Code.
The placement of I.B. in the Jan Mann Opportunity School's educational alternative program is, therefore, supported by the facts and consistent with law.
