Student Advocacy Michigan

10/13/2026

MYTH: Giving a student extended time or other accommodations is cheating. It gives them an unfair advantage over their peers.

FACT: Accommodations are designed to level the playing field, not tilt it. They remove barriers created by the disability — they do not give students an advantage that students without the disability do not need.

A student with dyslexia who receives extended time is not being given more time than other students need. They are being given the time they need to decode text at the rate their brain processes written language — which is slower than average due to a neurological difference, not a choice or a lack of effort.

A student with ADHD who is allowed to take a test in a quiet room is not getting something other students need. They are being given access to a testing environment that allows their brain to function more comparably to their peers.

The comparison to cheating reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of what accommodations are for. They are not advantages. They are adjustments that allow a student with a disability to demonstrate what they know without the disability being the primary factor in the outcome.

If you have ever heard the cheating argument from a teacher or administrator, that is a response worth addressing directly — because it affects whether accommodations are being implemented consistently and with genuine intention.

10/12/2026

IEP goals are supposed to be measurable. That is a federal requirement. But measurable is interpreted very broadly in practice, and a lot of goals that technically include a number do not actually tell you much about whether the student is making meaningful progress.

Here is how to evaluate whether a goal is genuinely measurable.

A measurable goal specifies a skill or behavior that can be directly observed or assessed. It includes a baseline — where the student is starting from. It includes a target — what the student is expected to achieve. It specifies how progress will be measured. And it includes a timeframe — by when the target should be reached.

A goal that says the student will improve reading comprehension to 80 percent accuracy looks measurable on the surface. But it raises questions: 80 percent accuracy on what? At what reading level? Measured how? Starting from where?

A goal that says the student will correctly answer literal comprehension questions at the third-grade level with 80 percent accuracy across four out of five consecutive probes, measured using weekly curriculum-based assessments, is more genuinely measurable because every element is specified.

When reviewing goals, ask whether you can tell from the goal itself exactly how you will know whether your child met it. If you cannot, the goal is not specific enough to hold anyone accountable.

10/11/2026

October is ADHD Awareness Month, Learning Disabilities Awareness Month, and Dyslexia Awareness Month.

If your child has any of these diagnoses and the IEP still does not feel right — this is the month to look at it.

I help families throughout Michigan review IEPs for students with ADHD, learning disabilities, and dyslexia.

Link in my bio.

10/10/2026

October is Dyslexia Awareness Month. For students with dyslexia, federal special education law provides specific protections that parents should know.

Under IDEA, if a school has reason to believe a student has a disability — including a specific learning disability in reading — the school must evaluate the student in all areas related to the suspected disability. For students with potential dyslexia, this means the evaluation should include assessments of phonological processing, phonological awareness, rapid naming, word recognition, reading fluency, and spelling — not just a general reading achievement score.

If your child has characteristics associated with dyslexia and the school has not evaluated them in these specific areas, you can request in writing that a comprehensive evaluation be conducted addressing these specific areas of concern.

Additionally, in Michigan, the Michigan Dyslexia Law includes provisions related to early screening and identification of students with characteristics of dyslexia. It is worth understanding what your district is required to do under state law as well as federal law. Contact the Michigan Department of Education or a Michigan advocate for current information on state requirements.

This reflects federal law under IDEA. Michigan-specific requirements are referenced above. Verify current state requirements with MDE if you are in Michigan.

10/10/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1CMH7bDejc/?mibextid=wwXIfr

10/09/2026

ADHD is one of the most common neurodevelopmental conditions affecting students in school settings. It is also one of the most misunderstood in terms of what the educational implications actually are.

Executive functioning — the set of mental processes that help people plan, organize, manage time, regulate emotion, and initiate and complete tasks — is significantly impacted in most individuals with ADHD. For many students, it is the core of why school is so hard.

What executive functioning deficits look like in the classroom: assignments started but not finished. Materials consistently lost or forgotten. Long-term projects not begun until the night before they are due. Tests failed despite demonstrated knowledge in class. Emotional outbursts when transitions happen unexpectedly. Inconsistent performance that makes adults wonder whether the student is choosing when to try.

Supporting executive functioning requires deliberate, proactive strategies — external structures that replace the internal regulation the student's brain is not yet providing on its own. Checklists. Timers. Check-in routines. Explicit organizational systems. Frequent, low-stakes feedback.

When these supports are in the IEP and implemented consistently, the difference in student performance can be significant. When they are absent, students with ADHD are left to manage neurological challenges with strategies that were not designed for how their brains work.

If executive functioning is not addressed in your child's IEP, that is a conversation worth starting this month.

10/09/2026

Lots of proposed changes in Michigan special education administrative laws. I don't support most of this. A great portion of this will make it harder for families to get the support their children need and exercise procedural safeguards.

No...just no!

https://bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/opinion-michigan-should-enforce-not-erase-protections-for-students-with-disabilities/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook&fbclid=IwZnRzaAU1E1VleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBwZG9mBWZkaWQWUP9X-Q5FpDveE4ZoKF974j0mFMZbUnNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR46X15nsiUMBycnn0k6Bqm6gQzJfzu-c1N-2fYUGuA9UWezcdEGvPKpxeH-Qw_aem_dDDuz2OjA90IYFL9-liAcg

The department’s decision not to use a safeguard should not become the rationale for erasing it.

10/08/2026

This one is personal.

I have worked with many families where the central message from the school has been some version of your child is smart, they just need to apply themselves.

I have been that parent sitting in that meeting. And I know what it feels like to know, with absolute certainty, that your child is trying — is trying harder than most people in that room will ever understand — and to have the school's conclusion be the opposite.

The intelligence narrative is complicated in the context of learning disabilities and ADHD. Yes, many of these students are highly intelligent. That intelligence sometimes masks the disability for years. And when it does, the gap between what the student appears capable of and what they are producing gets attributed to effort rather than to the very real neurological challenges that are making the work harder than it looks.

Your child's intelligence is not the problem. It is not evidence against the disability. It is not a reason to withhold support.

If you have been told your child is smart enough to do this without the IEP, ask the team to show you the data that demonstrates the current program is sufficient to allow them to make meaningful progress. Because that is the actual legal standard — not whether they are capable, but whether the program is giving them a fair chance.

10/07/2026

A family came to me after their son had been receiving reading support through his IEP for three years. He had a diagnosis of dyslexia from a private neuropsychologist. His school evaluation had identified a specific learning disability in reading. His IEP included a reading goal and pull-out services with the special education teacher.

But the word dyslexia had never appeared in an IEP meeting. The reading instruction being provided was a general intervention program used for all students with reading difficulties. And three years in, his reading scores had made minimal progress.

In Michigan, as in many states, there are specific expectations about identifying and addressing dyslexia. The Michigan Dyslexia Law includes requirements for screening, identification, and instruction for students with characteristics of dyslexia.

When I reviewed the records, the instruction was not consistent with the structured literacy methodology recommended by the neuropsychologist and supported by the research base for dyslexia intervention.

We asked the team specifically about the instructional methodology being used, whether it aligned with the evidence base for dyslexia, and whether the school had considered the Michigan dyslexia requirements in developing the current plan.

The conversation that followed was overdue.

Details changed to protect privacy. This scenario involves Michigan-specific law — verify current requirements with MDE or a Michigan-licensed advocate.