Sec504 Quiz Answers

What’s Your 504 IQ?
Answers to the Quiz, with Explanations
In December 2016, the U. S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) published
the “Parent and Educator Guide to Section 504 in Public Schools,” a comprehensive 52-page
guidance document.
The URL for the Parent and Educator Guide to Section 504 is:
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/504-resource-guide-201612.pdf
The Parent and Educator Guide to Section 504 includes eleven scenarios. These scenarios are
used to educate readers about legal issues and concepts under Section 504.
Wrightslaw used these scenarios to create a quiz called “What’s your 504 IQ?” The quiz
includes eleven questions. Each question has several multiple-choice answers.
Parent and Educator Resource Guide to Section 504 in Public Elementary and Secondary
Schools
Eleven Scenarios
Scenario 1 – Suspected Disability & Evaluation

Rosita is a fourth grade student at her local public elementary school. Her teacher notices that
Rosita has trouble concentrating during class lessons and that it takes Rosita significantly longer
than most students to complete in-class assignments. While the teacher acknowledges that it is
very difficult for Rosita to stay seated and on-task, she does not think Rosita needs special
education services because she is earning B’s and C’s. From a legal perspective, what should
the teacher do?
A. Rosita’s teacher needs to obtain parental consent to implement more restrictive

strategies, (such as restraints) to ensure that Rosita stays in her seat and on task.
B. Rosita’s teacher needs to inform the proper individuals in the school system that
Rosita needs to be evaluated.
C. Because Rosita is earning passing grades, there is no legal basis to seek an evaluation.
D. Rosita’s teacher should share her concerns with the child’s parent and request consent
to refer Rosita to Tier I of the school’s Response to Intervention program.
ANSWER # 1
(Section 504 Resource Guide, page 14)
Correct answer is B.
Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 1 www.wrightslaw.com

Ó 2017, Deltaville, VA Permission granted to copy, reproduce and
What’s Your 504 IQ? distribute so long as credit given to Wrightslaw.com
In this situation, Rosita’s teacher needs to inform the proper individuals in the school system
that Rosita needs to be evaluated. It is only through an evaluation process that a school district
can properly determine if a student has a disability and needs Section 504 services. Note that
grades alone, whether good or bad, do not necessarily indicate whether a student has or does not
have a disability. Even if Rosita does not require special education, she could still receive other
Section 504 services if she meets the Section 504 definition of disability and is in need of related
aids or services or supplemental services. For example, Rosita may have ADHD and may,
because of her ADHD, need extra time to complete assignments and assistance from a classroom
aide to stay on task during class. However, even if Rosita does not require either special
education or related aids and services, as long as she is a student with a disability under Section
504, she is still protected under that law from other forms of discrimination (for example,
bullying and harassment - see the discussion on page 32). The teacher’s referral of Rosita for
evaluation is central to complying with Section 504 here.
******************************************
Scenario 2 – Suspected Disability & Involvement of Knowledgeable People

Robert’s seventh grade teachers report that he often falls asleep, without warning, during class
and misses instruction. His parents insist that he gets a good night sleep but note that their
pediatrician told them Robert might have narcolepsy, a chronic brain disorder that involves poor
control of sleep and wake patterns. From a legal perspective, what should the teachers do?
A. Staff should seek an evaluation to determine whether Robert has a physical or

mental impairment that is interfering with his ability to stay awake.
B. Teachers should talk with Robert and his parents, individually and separately, to
determine if Robert really gets a good night sleep. Determine if he has a television in his
room and / or internet access after his parents go to bed. If onset of sleep is questionable,
his teachers should help the parents investigate options to automatically turn off Wi-Fi
and TV access to cable or satellite service after a specific time at night or remove the
television and computer from his room.
C. School staff cannot rely on a pediatrician’s opinion that Robert “might have
narcolepsy.” To address the behavioral issue of falling asleep in class, the staff should
initiate a “Positive Behavioral Intervention” (PBI) and create a “Behavioral Intervention
Plan” (BIP).
D. Staff should seek parental consent to talk with Robert’s pediatrician about
prescription medication options that may be helpful.
ANSWER # 2
Correct answer is A.

Staff should seek an evaluation to determine whether Robert has a physical or mental
impairment that is interfering with his ability to stay awake. The group who meets to review
this evaluation and make a decision about services must consist of knowledgeable people (for
example, school nurses, teachers, counselors, psychologists, school administrators, social
workers, doctors, etc.) who, in interpreting evaluation data and determining the needed services,
carefully review and analyze information collected from a variety of sources (for example, the
pediatrician’s report; aptitude and psychological test results; the student’s grade reports; teacher
observations; the student’s social and cultural background; the student’s family).
If the evaluation, which must be conducted at no cost to the parents or student, shows that the
student has a disability, then the knowledgeable group (that is, people who are knowledgeable
about the student, the meaning of the evaluation data and about the placement options), must
together determine placement, including the special education or related aids and services the
student needs under Section 504.
******************************************
Scenario 3 – Disabilities in Remission

Doctors diagnosed Omar with cancer during at the beginning of the summer break, between
fourth grade and fifth grade. When initially diagnosed, Omar was weak and tired all the time,
and, at times, unable to even get out of bed or dress or feed himself. He received chemotherapy
in July and August and returned to school, without any symptoms of his disease, at the beginning
of the school year. At that time his parents informed the school of Omar’s cancer diagnosis. It is
now November and doctors have informed Omar’s parents that his disease appears to be in
remission. Omar’s mom notes that he runs and plays like all the other children and his grades
are great. From a legal perspective, how would a group of knowledgeable persons determine if
Omar has a disability?
A. A “group of knowledgeable persons” must obtain medical confirmation that Omar’s

cancer is in remission and, from their own observations, confirm that “he runs and plays
like all the other children and his grades are great.” After receiving these confirmations,
no further steps are required for the school staff to determine if Omar has a disability.
B. Since Omar’s cancer is a medical condition and is in remission, a “group of

knowledgeable persons” is not required to determine if Omar has a disability.
C. Since Omar’s “grades are great” and “he runs and plays like other children,” there is
no evidence that the cancer, now in remission, is adversely affecting his educational
performance. An evaluation is not required at this time. If the cancer re-occurs, then an
evaluation is required.
D. A group of knowledgeable persons will determine if Omar is a student with a

disability because a student who has an impairment that is episodic or in remission
is a person with a disability if the impairment substantially limits a major life
activity when it is active.

ANSWER # 3
Correct answer is D.
A student who has an impairment that is episodic (for example, epilepsy or post-traumatic
stress disorder) or in remission is considered to be a person with a disability if, when active
(that is, when symptoms are evident or reoccur), the impairment substantially limits a
major life activity. When active, Omar’s illness left him weak and unable to get out of bed. In
other words, when active, cancer substantially limits his ability to care for himself which, under
Federal law, is a major life activity. Moreover, the cancer substantially limits the major bodily
function of normal cell growth, which is also a major life activity under Federal law. For this
reason, the group of knowledgeable persons would determine that Omar is a student with a
disability.
However, he may or may not require special education or related aids and services that are
designed to meet his individual educational needs as adequately as the needs of non-disabled
students are met. Even if Omar does not need special education or related aids and services, he
would still be protected under Section 504, for example, from bullying and harassment based on
his disability.
School districts must have standards and procedures to evaluate students who may have a
disability and need special education or related services. The evaluation of a student, however,
must be individualized. Although Section 504 does not require a specific process, the standards
and procedures must meet certain requirements. Specifically, the evaluation standards and
procedures must ensure that:
• Evaluations consist of more than IQ tests;

• Evaluations measure specific areas of educational need. These could include speech
processing, inability to concentrate, and behavioral concerns;
• Tests are selected and administered to the student in a manner that best ensures that the
test results accurately reflect the student’s aptitude or achievement or other factor being
measured, rather than reflect the student’s disability, except where those are the factors
being measured;
• Tests and other evaluation materials are validated for the specific purpose for which
they are used; and
• Tests are appropriately administered by trained personnel.
******************************************
Scenario 4 – Appropriate Testing

Juan is a student in the third grade. His teacher tests reading comprehension with written in-
class quizzes. Juan has trouble finishing the quizzes on time, and his answers are short and
incomplete. Because of the poor responses on the quizzes, Juan’s teacher believes he may have a
disability related to his ability to understand what he reads (reading comprehension skills). The
school conducts an evaluation that requires Juan to read a passage and to write responses to a

series of questions about the passage. From a legal perspective, was this testing appropriate to
evaluate Juan’s suspected disability?
A. Since Juan is in the third grade, it is premature to test Juan for difficulties in reading
comprehension.
B. The question fails to clarify whether the test is truly “related to his ability to
understand what he reads” or his ability “to write responses to a series of questions about
the passage.” Based on the facts presented, it cannot be determined if the test is
appropriate.
C. Since Juan was not referred for a comprehensive evaluation under the IDEA and a
single test cannot be used in isolation to determine if a child is eligible for services, the
test was not appropriate to “evaluate Juan’s suspected disability.”
D. The test is not appropriate for determining whether Juan has a disability related
to reading comprehension if he has a disability related to writing.
ANSWER # 4
(Parent and Educator Guide to Section 504, page 17)
This test would not be appropriate for determining whether Juan has a disability related to
reading comprehension if he has a disability related to writing. Specifically, if Juan struggles
with writing, such as trouble staying in the margins, organizing words left to right and getting
words on paper, Juan may have a disability related to his ability to write manually and may not
score well on the test because he cannot finish answering questions in the time given, not
because he does not understand the reading passage. In this example, Juan may have excellent
reading comprehension skills, but his inability to write well quickly may result in a low test
score. (Parent and Educator Guide to Section 504, page xxx.)
******************************************
Scenario 5 – Timeframes for Evaluation

Mr. Williams is very concerned. In September, two weeks after the new school year began, his
16-year-old son told him that he was having a hard time hearing his teacher and, as a result, he
is unable to take detailed notes during class lectures. The school promised to evaluate the
student, and Mr. Williams consented to the evaluation before the end of September. However, it
is now December and, to date, his son has not been evaluated. From a legal perspective, should
the school have completed the evaluation before December?
A. While the school “promised to evaluate the student,” the failure to complete the
evaluation is a “de minimis” procedural issue and not a violation of Section 504 if the
school initiates and completes the evaluation immediately.

B. The parent provided no independent hearing screening or audiology evaluation and
wanted to the school to do an evaluation. Because the school had no such “Notice” of the
need for an evaluation, the school did not need to rely on “hearsay” allegations from the
parent. Since the school was not required to conduct an evaluation at this time, the school
did not violate Section 504 by failing to complete an evaluation.
C. Answers A and B above are both essentially correct.
D. The school should have competed the evaluation before December. Although
Section 504 does not provide a specific timeline for a school district to complete an
evaluation, incorporating by reference the IDEA requirements, the initial evaluation
must be conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation
unless the State established a different timeframe for conducting evaluations under
IDEA.
ANSWER # 5
Most likely, yes. Section 504 does not provide a specific amount of time for school districts
to complete an evaluation. However, under the IDEA (another Federal law that protects
students with disabilities and of which schools should be aware), an initial evaluation must be
conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation or if the State has
established a different timeframe for conducting the evaluation, within that timeframe. OCR
generally looks to the IDEA timeline, or if applicable, to State requirements or local district
policy to assess the reasonableness of the time it takes the school to evaluate the student
once parental consent has been obtained.
******************************************
Scenario 6 – Disagreement Over Need to Evaluate

Maya is a good student who has an A in reading, an A in math, and a B in each of her other
classes. She maintains these grades even though she has been absent several times since the
beginning of the school year for a gastrointestinal disorder. In addition, she often has to leave
school early because of vomiting. Maya’s mom took Maya to the doctor and, the following week,
Maya’s mom presented Maya’s teacher with a medical report indicating that Maya suffers from
gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Maya’s mom then asked the teacher if the school
would evaluate Maya to see if she is eligible for Section 504 services. The teacher told Maya’s
mom not to worry, noting that an evaluation “is not necessary at this time because Maya
continues to do well in all her classes.” The teacher then promised to let Maya’s mother know
immediately if Maya’s grades begin to decline. From a legal perspective, should the teacher
have responded in this manner?
A. Neither GERD nor vomiting are classified as conditions that mandate eligibility under
IDEA or Section 504 so an evaluation is not necessary.

B. Because Maya is maintaining A’s and B’s and is doing “well in all her classes,” an
evaluation is not required at this time. Later, if Maya’s grades decline or there are other
indicators with problems in school related to GERD or vomiting, an evaluation may be
appropriate at that time.
C. The teacher should not have refused the parent’s request to evaluate Maya for
504 eligibility.
D. Since the vomiting occurred at school and necessitated early dismissal, that condition
adversely affected Maya’s educational performance. She should have been evaluated and
found eligible for services under IDEA, which would also provide her with the
protections under Section 504.
ANSWER # 6
Correct answer is C.
No. Not every illness will automatically result in Section 504 protection for the affected student.
On the other hand, even if a student earns good grades, he or she may still have a disability. For
example, even if Maya’s disease did not interfere with her ability to attend school, she might
still be determined to be a student with a disability under Section 504 because the disease
substantially limits a major life activity (that is, her ability to digest food). In such a situation,
Maya may not need special education or related aids and services; however, she would still be
protected (for example, from bullying and harassment based on disability) under Section
504.
Given these specific facts—a medically-diagnosed problem with the student’s digestive system,
and the parent’s report that the student is frequently forced to miss school because of this
medical problem - Section 504 would require the school to refer Maya for a Section 504
evaluation to determine whether she needs special education or related aids and services,
including modifications, because of a disability. Note that if the school fails to conduct an
evaluation of the student and it is later determined that a school evaluation was necessary, and
that Maya needed, but did not receive, special education and/or related aids and services, the
school would be in violation of Section 504 and may be required to provide compensatory
services for Maya for the period during which the school failed to offer FAPE.
The Section 504 regulations require school districts to draw upon information from a variety of
sources in interpreting evaluation data and making placement decisions. In other words, while a
medical diagnosis alone can inform school staff about whether a student has a disease that
substantially limits a major life activity, it is unlikely that a medical diagnosis alone will also
provide enough information for school staff to determine what services the student needs. Other
information that could also be collected and analyzed includes, for example, attendance records,
parent information, grade reports, aptitude and achievement tests, teacher recommendations, and

the student’s physical condition, social or cultural background, and adaptive behavior.73 The
type of tests and other information obtained will vary for each individual student depending on
the suspected impairment.
73 34 C.F.R. § 104.35(c).
In this scenario, Maya has a disability. Because Maya’s medically diagnosed impairment
interferes with her ability to attend school, the school district may need to, among other things,
modify how the school’s attendance policy applies to Maya to ensure that Maya is given extra
time to complete assignments when she is absent because of her disability and that she is not
penalized for absences resulting from her disability.
Finally, even if the teacher did not make the referral because she did not believe that Maya
needed special education or related services as a result of her digestive disorder, the teacher or
other school personnel should have provided Maya’s mother with a copy of the district’s
procedural safeguards, which would include information about the opportunity to have an
impartial hearing to resolve the disagreement over Maya’s need for an evaluation, and an
opportunity to review her daughter’s records.
******************************************
Scenario 7 – Reevaluations and FAPE

Salim is a student with a disability and he has a Section 504 plan. At the start of the spring
semester, he received an out-of-school suspension for 12 consecutive school days. From a legal
perspective, is the school required to reevaluate Salim?
A. The child may be suspended for 12 consecutive school days, or longer, until
completion of a determination about whether his violation of the code of conduct was a
manifestation of his disability.
B. Yes, a 12-day suspension is a significant change in placement that mandates a

reevaluation.
C. IDEA, which controls in this instance, does not require an evaluation so a

reevaluation is not necessary.
D. A disciplinary suspension does not require an evaluation, even if it is considered to be

a significant change in placement.
ANSWER # 7
Yes. Although the Section 504 regulations do not set a specific timeframe within which students
with disabilities must be reevaluated to make sure that they are receiving the appropriate
services, Section 504 requires schools to conduct reevaluations periodically, and before a

significant change in placement. OCR considers an exclusion from the educational
program of more than 10 consecutive school days to be a significant change in placement.
In this example, the school must reevaluate Salim, prior to imposing the 11th day of suspension,
to determine whether his misconduct is caused by or related to his disability (manifestation
determination), and if so to further evaluate to determine if his current placement is appropriate.
******************************************
Scenario 8 – Accessibility
Ayana recently enrolled in a school that does not have an elevator. The school was built in the
early 1960s and, due to limited resources, the district has never altered the building. Ayana, who
is unable to walk upstairs due to her disability, is dismayed when she discovers that the art
studio is on the second floor; she had planned to take an art class the following semester. From
a legal perspective, what should the school do to address this situation?
A. Move the art studio to the first floor. Access and equal opportunity to the studio
are required for Ayana, yet structural change to the building may not be mandated
for a building constructed “in the early 1960’s.”
B. Meaningful access to art education is required, so the art teacher should provide
alternative or supplemental educational services to Ayana in an individualized setting to
meet Ayana’s unique educational needs.
C. Schools are required to “consider” alternative or supplemental educational services

offered or suggested by the parent, but are not required to implement the parent’s
requests or suggestions.
D. The school must provide either an elevator or ramp or discontinue the art class for the
next semester to avoid a claim of discrimination against Ayana.
ANSWER # 8
Districts are not required to make each existing facility or every part of an existing facility
accessible if the facility in question was constructed before June 4, 1977; however, districts must
still provide students with disabilities access to the program or activity in question. Access to
programs operated by a school in older facilities that are totally or partially inaccessible may, in
some instances, be provided through means other than structural change, such as relocation of
programs. School districts are required to have procedures in place to ensure that parents,
students, and other interested persons can obtain information about the location of services,
activities, and facilities that are accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. The
school in this scenario is an existing facility because it was built before June 4, 1977, and
therefore, program access is required to ensure compliance with Section 504 and the ADA. The

school may, for example, move the art studio to a room on the first floor so that Ayana has
an equal opportunity to participate in the art class with her peers.
******************************************
Scenario 9 – Unjustified Different Treatment

Ricardo has a peanut allergy. His fourth-grade class is going on a field trip to the local
aquarium and Ricardo’s father is told that he must chaperone Ricardo on the trip because the
teachers will be very busy and cannot ensure that Ricardo will be protected from exposure to
peanuts or peanut products while on the trip, especially during the lunch break. Ricardo’s father
cannot go on the field trip because he has to go to work. As a result, the teachers tell Ricardo he
cannot attend the field trip. Ricardo’s father complains to the principal, noting that no other
parent is required to attend the field trip. From a legal perspective, should the school have
required Ricardo’s father to attend the field trip?
A. No. The school may not require Ricardo’s father to act as a chaperone on the
field trip simply because Ricardo has a disability.
B. Exposure to peanuts can be a life-threatening condition for a person with this allergy.
The possible death of Ricardo and the fear that his peers could see their classmate die is
an extraordinary circumstance and a “reasonable” exception under Section 504 so
Ricardo’s exclusion from the field trip is permissible.
C. During field trips, the school district is required to have a nurse or other staff person
trained in the administration of life saving measures including CPR and “EpiPens.” The
school district is solely responsible for the child’s welfare and cannot require the parent
to participate as a chaperone on the field trip.
D. The school can require the parent to participate if that requirement was previously
written into and is a part of the child’s Section 504 Plan, or IEP, or Individual Health
Care Plan (IHCP / HCP).
ANSWER # 9
No. In this case, none of the parents of students without disabilities were told that they must
attend the field trip; therefore, the school may not require Ricardo’s father’s attendance
simply because Ricardo has a disability. Under Section 504, the school is responsible for
making it possible for Ricardo to participate in this learning opportunity like his peers, without
parental assistance.
******************************************

Scenario 10 – Procedural Safeguards
Ms. Lee told staff at her son’s school that she believes her son has a disability because he cannot
seem to sit still and concentrate on his assignments. Although Ms. Lee has made multiple
requests, the school has refused to evaluate him because the teachers do not believe the student
has a disability. Ms. Lee does not receive any communication from the school about why they
will not evaluate her son. From a legal perspective, is the school’s approach permissible?
A. If the parent’s “multiple requests” were made orally, not in writing, there was no
written request nor written consent to evaluate. Given those facts, the school’s approach
is legally defensible and permissible.
B. The parent’s belief is that her son “cannot . . . sit still and concentrate” is not a
sufficient legal basis to justify a Section 504 evaluation or an evaluation under IDEA for
an IEP. The school’s decision not to evaluate is permissible. The school should have
helped the parent better understand that her concerns cannot be the basis to initiate an
evaluation.
C. The school cannot ignore the parent’s request so the school’s approach is not
permissible.
D. If there is no basis to suspect a disability, a school district is not required to respond

to a parent’s request to evaluate their child.
ANSWER # 10
Correct answer is C.
No. A school district cannot simply ignore a parent’s request to evaluate his or her child,
even if the school does not believe that the student has a disability. A school district is required
to establish, implement, and inform parents about a system of procedural safeguards that are
designed to help resolve FAPE-related disagreements regarding identification, evaluation, or
educational placement of a student. As part of this system, a school must notify parents of any
evaluation or placement actions and inform parents of their right to: (i) examine records or
documents that the school relied on in making its decision about the student; (ii) request an
impartial hearing that provides the parent with an opportunity to participate and permits
representation by an attorney; and (iii) have an opportunity for review of the decision made at
the hearing.
******************************************
Scenario 11 – Retaliation
Ms. Chen, the mother of a student with a disability, complained privately to the principal that
her daughter and other students with disabilities are not receiving an appropriate education at
the school. The situation did not improve so Ms. Chen raised the issue with the principal again

at a recent Parent Teacher Association meeting in front of other parents and teachers. The
following week, Ms. Chen, who had been a helpful and effective classroom volunteer for many
months, received a letter from the principal indicating that Ms. Chen can no longer volunteer in
her daughter’s classroom. Moreover, the principal offers no explanation for this change in
policy in the letter. Ms. Chen asks around and learns that none of the other parent volunteers
received a similar letter. From a legal perspective, may the principal do that?
A. The principal may terminate the parent’s volunteer activities and is not required to
offer a reason for the termination.
B. If there was no evidence that the parent was disruptive or dangerous, the
principal may not terminate the parent’s volunteer activities. The termination of
volunteer activity is retaliation, which is prohibited by Section 504.
C. If approved in advance, by the principal’s immediate superior, such as the school

superintendent, superintendent’s designee, or the school board, the principal may
terminate the parent’s participation.
D. It is the building principal’s responsibility to recognize that the parent has the
potential to become disruptive in the public school setting so the principal has the
discretion to terminate the parent’s volunteer activities.
ANSWER # 11
Denying Ms. Chen the ability to volunteer in her daughter’s classroom would be unlawful
retaliation if the school did so because the parent complained to the principal that her daughter
was not receiving FAPE (either initially or in front of the Parent Teacher Association). However,
if the school did so for a legitimate reason (for example, because the parent was disrupting
instruction or endangering students), then the school may not have violated Section 504. The
ultimate determination will depend on whether evidence indicates that the school’s actions were
based on a legitimate reason for keeping the parent out of the classroom or if the school’s
explanation was a pretext (excuse) for retaliation or if retaliation was a motivating factor in
addition to the legitimate reason. In this case, the school had no evidence to suggest that Ms.
Chen had been, or would likely be, disruptive or dangerous. Therefore, if the school allowed
other parents, who did not file a complaint, to continue to volunteer in class, these facts would
suggest that forbidding Ms. Chen from volunteering based on concern about disrupting class or
endangering students is pretext and that the sole reason for banning her from class was to
retaliate because she raised her concerns about services for students with disabilities.
******************************************

END of 504 Quiz Answers and Explanation

Please download OCR’s Parent and Educator Guide to Section 504 located at:
http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/ocr/sec504.guide.ocr.2016.pdf


Sec504 Quiz Answers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sec504 Quiz Answers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sec504 Quiz Answers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What’s Your 504 IQ?

Answers to the Quiz, with Explanations

Scenario 1 – Suspected Disability & Evaluation

A. Rosita’s teacher needs to obtain parental consent to implement more restrictive

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 1 www.wrightslaw.com

Scenario 2 – Suspected Disability & Involvement of Knowledgeable People

A. Staff should seek an evaluation to determine whether Robert has a physical or

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 2 www.wrightslaw.com

Scenario 3 – Disabilities in Remission

A. A “group of knowledgeable persons” must obtain medical confirmation that Omar’s

B. Since Omar’s cancer is a medical condition and is in remission, a “group of

D. A group of knowledgeable persons will determine if Omar is a student with a

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 3 www.wrightslaw.com

• Evaluations consist of more than IQ tests;

Scenario 4 – Appropriate Testing

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 4 www.wrightslaw.com

Scenario 5 – Timeframes for Evaluation

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 5 www.wrightslaw.com

C. Answers A and B above are both essentially correct.

Scenario 6 – Disagreement Over Need to Evaluate

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 6 www.wrightslaw.com

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 7 www.wrightslaw.com

Scenario 7 – Reevaluations and FAPE

B. Yes, a 12-day suspension is a significant change in placement that mandates a

C. IDEA, which controls in this instance, does not require an evaluation so a

D. A disciplinary suspension does not require an evaluation, even if it is considered to be

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 8 www.wrightslaw.com

C. Schools are required to “consider” alternative or supplemental educational services

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 9 www.wrightslaw.com

Scenario 9 – Unjustified Different Treatment

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 10 www.wrightslaw.com

D. If there is no basis to suspect a disability, a school district is not required to respond

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 11 www.wrightslaw.com

C. If approved in advance, by the principal’s immediate superior, such as the school

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 12 www.wrightslaw.com

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq. 13 www.wrightslaw.com

You might also like