Honoring Team Decision-Making During Manifestation Determination Meetings Through Collaborative and Proactive Solutions

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act requires schools to conduct a manifestation determination (MD) meeting when suspending students with disabilities for more than 10 days. The MD procedure is intended to safeguard educational access by providing a process to determine if a student’s disability is related to the suspending behavior. An accurate decision requires educational team members to effectively collaborate to review relevant data and the student’s individualized education program. Collaborative and proactive solutions (CPS) offer a framework for collaboration that may ensure that all team members meaningfully participate during the MD meeting while encouraging a rigorous analysis of student-specific data. The use of CPS is proposed as a framework to generate meaningful collaboration in MD meetings, which may result in positive student outcomes that reach beyond merely addressing a behavioral violation.

The Social Activity of the Subjective Middle Class of the Russian Region: Results of Qualitative Sociological Research

The article presents the results of a study of the middle class of the Russian region in terms of the manifestation of various types of social activity by actors. The emphasis on the analysis of social activity is motivated by the consideration of this attribute as a criterion for the allocation of the middle class in the post-industrial period. The research method – an in-depth focused interview through which two tasks are solved: identifying the degree of significance for informants of social activity and examples of its manifestation; determination of the degree of readiness to participate in the implementation of the innovation development strategy of the Tomsk Region and thereby act as a “driver” of social changes. Representatives of the middle class are included in the sample based on self-identification. It was revealed that the middle class of the Russian region is active in realising personal, but not social goals. Such a characteristic of the post-industrial middle class as the willingness to act as a driver of social development is not observed. Options are proposed for solving this problem related to the mechanisms of involving the middle class in regional planning and decision-making regarding generally significant issues.

Navigating the Gray Area: A School District's Documentation of the Relationship between Disability and Misconduct

Background/Context The administration of student discipline is one of many responsibilities under the purview of teachers and educational leaders across the country. Maintaining a safe environment with minimal disruptions is not an easy task. From existing research on student discipline, we have learned that critical examination of data and continuous reflection are important, particularly in light of documented disparities in discipline practices. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), before a school district may discipline a student with a disability for greater than 10 days, it must first conduct what is referred to as a manifestation determination review (MDR) (20 U.S.C. §1415(k)(1)(E)). During this review process, the current version of the law requires school districts to address two questions: (1) Was the student's behavior caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial relationship to, the student's disability? (2) Was the student's misconduct caused by the district's failure to implement the student's individualized education program (IEP), as required by law? This study examines the implementation of this standard. Research Question This study poses the following research question: What factors (explicit and implicit) influence decision makers when deciding whether a student's misconduct was a manifestation of his or her disability? Research Design This project used a case study approach to examine 80 MDR decisions in one large urban school district in order to better understand how decision makers implement this standard. Specifically, this study reviewed 40 randomly selected decisions wherein decision makers determined that the student's actions were not a manifestation of his or her disability and 40 randomly selected decisions wherein decision makers determined that the student's actions were a manifestation of his or her disability. Findings/Results Decision makers cited the academic and behavioral manifestations of students’ disabilities, students’ behavioral histories, students’ ability to control their actions, and connections to the home and community. Despite these consistent factors, the striking similarities between Yes and No decisions illustrates the overall arbitrary nature of the decision-making process. Conclusions/Recommendations This article discusses implications that attend to both the procedure and substance of manifestation determination review.

Were the student’s actions a manifestation of the student’s disability? The need for policy change and guidance

Under federal special education law, before a school district may discipline a student with a disability for greater than 10 days, it must first determine whether the student’s actions were a manifestation of his or her disability (IDEA, 2004). This requirement, referred to as manifestation determination review (MDR), aims to ensure that students with disabilities do not experience a significant disciplinary change in placement for actions that are caused by their disabilities. This article will discuss the evolution of the legal standard and the policy implications of a study that examined 80 MDR decisions in one large urban school district.

Manifestation Determination Decisions and Students With Emotional/Behavioral Disorders

Sixteen general and special education teachers were randomly assigned to one of four teams that were to make manifestation determinations using two different “hidden profiles” case studies based on students with an emotional behavioral disability. One case study was constructed to support a decision of the behavior not being a manifestation of the disability and the other case study was constructed to support a conclusion that the behavior of concern was a manifestation of the disability. To fully understand the student and behavior of concern, team members were required to actively share and discuss all of the relevant information they possessed. Both the teams working with profiles supporting the manifestation of the disability reached that conclusion; however, the two teams working with profiles that supported a non-manifestation of disability conclusion reached different conclusions, one declaring the behavior to be a non-manifestation and the other declaring it to be a manifestation of the disability. Overall, participants found the manifestation determination process to be an effective way to discuss student behavior, but special and general educators approached the determination process differently. Discussion of the manifestation determination review (MDR) process is presented along with implications for practice, limitations, and future research.