BSEA:Decisions

See also fully searchable record of rulings back to 1998

The DESE web site contains the rulings but it posts them in no particular order under links with cryptic names.

The following links and summaries make it easier to find relevant legal and educational references on special education.

The school systems almost always win these cases because they only go to hearing if they are sure they will win. If they have any doubt, they settle in advance. Nonetheless, each case gives a detailed description of the experience of one child and family. Those descriptions are very valuable for learning about services and practices in special education.

Under each link I note the key points of the case as I see them.

Decisions

Framingham v Natick and DESE. Assignment Decision 5-28-2010

Dispute over which school system the student belongs to.

• Anonymous Reading Decision 5-24-2010

The school system is kept anonymous to protect the family's confidentiality.
This decision includes details on reading methodologies, especially the Reading Recovery program (http://www.readingrecovery.org/) with some mention of "sequential, rules-based special education methods such as Wilson, Project Read, or Orton-Gillingham". Lots of examples of reading tests and diagnostic tools. Also gives a very good explanation of how difficulty with learning to read can cause a child emotional stress.
The hearing officer decided "where the School’s chosen methodology is solidly grounded on unrefuted diagnosis of the Student’s area of weakness, there is no basis for the BSEA to disturb the School’s decision". I interpret that to mean, only the school gets to decide which method will be used and it doesn't matter if it works or not. What matters to the law is if the school thought it might work based on the information they had at the time the IEP was written.

• Lexington 5-21-2010

Case of a child with Aspergers who wants to go to "school with like peers, that is, other gifted students within his age range". Lexington says he should go to Pathways. Detailed explanation of the challenges and opportunities facing a high school student "on the spectrum". Lexington wins, because they don't need to provide the best placement, only an "appropriate" one. This case uses the "you don't get a Cadillac you get a working Chevy" metaphor. The parents are also rebuked for not providing Lexington with all available information which allows the school system to say their IEP was valid based on the limited information they had at the time.

• Salem 5-14-2010

Hearing issues:

1. Whether Student is safe in school?
2. Whether Student’s paraprofessional is appropriate?

Excellent explanation of the challenges faced by a girl with PDD in middle school.
Involves a 13 year old child with ASD who was in a partial inclusion program which I believe is called the Compass program. The parent felt it wasn't working: she was "having many problems and was coming home in crisis every day". The school system used a CHINS against the parents. Extensive discussion of a Behavior Plan and details on social skills issues for a student with PDD. The student testified at this hearing and the hearing officer made comments on the relationship between the student and parent. Both points above ruled in favor of Salem so the student was denied the opportunity to change class or change aide.

• Somerset vs Fall River and DESE 5-10-2010

A dispute between Somerset and Fall River about a Kindergarden age student from Somerset who is put in foster care in Fall River by DCF. Somerset tries to block her from attending school in Somerset, saying Fall River is responsible. Hearing officer disagrees and says Somerset is responsible since the DCF foster home is analogous to being homeless and so she has a right to continue going to school in the same place as before.

• Greenfield 4-13-2010
• Randolph 4-9-2010
• Sudbury 4-9-2010
• Anonymous 3-26-2010
• Arlington 3-15-2010
• Harwich 3-8-2010
• Hingham 2-1-2010
• Natick 2-9-2010
• Anonymous 1-8-2010
• Newton 11-20-2009
• Attleboro 11-18-2009

Rulings

These are a little more legalistic and less education focused. Some contain statements of fact and they show the tricks of the trade used by lawyers on both sides to advance their case.

• Worcester CORRECTED RULING ON MOTION TO JOIN 3-9-2010
• Shrewsbury RULING ON REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF LEGAL STANDARD 2-18-2010
• Hudson MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2-2-2010
• Attleboro Parents’ Motion to Recuse Hearing Officer 10-09-2009
• Westwood Public Schools’ Motion To Dismiss Parent’s Hearing Request With Prejudice and/or Motion for Summary Judgment and Mother’s Motion to Require the District to Allow the Parent to Audiotape the Team Meeting 10-07-2009
• Attleboro Public Schools’ Motion To Dismiss Parents’ Hearing Request With Prejudice 9-29-2009
• RULING ON WORCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS’ MOTION FOR DIRECTED VERDICT 8-07-2009
• Bridgewater-Raynham Ruling on Parent’s/Student’s Motion for Re-Assignment of the Hearing Officer/Recusal and Bridgewater-Raynham Public Schools’ Request for Issuance of Subpoena to Dr. Steven Auster and Motion to Leave Open the Record for the Testimony of Dr. Auster 7-29-2009
• Brockton Recusal Motion 7-08-2009
• Fall River RULING RE JOINDER OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH 6-24-2009
• Motion of the Springfield Public Schools to Join the Department of Mental Retardation, the Department of Public Health and the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind in this appeal. 6-03-2009
• RULING ON HUDSON PUBLIC SCHOOLS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2-02-2009
• Scituate RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY DECISION 4-28-2009
• Natick RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS 4-07-2009

---

This project and information is not affiliated with the Mass DESE. It is an independent effort by private citizens intended to help the people of Massachusetts learn more about the Special Education in our state.

Much of this information is extracted from BSEA Searchable List of Rulings

Additional comments and information from public sources has also been included. The contents and links may have been edited as well. No representation is made as to the accuracy or validity of this information. This page is only intended to help people more easily keep in touch with the work of the Bureau of Special Education Appeals

Please add your comments on the discussion page and add to or update any other pages. Make sure to preface the names of any new pages with "BSEA:"