David Bateman, PhD, is a nationally recognized expert in special education dispute resolution and legal compliance. He has ten-years of experience as a due process hearing officer and complaint investigator and has since served as a second-tier hearing officer in multiple states. In addition, over the past ten years, he has worked as a mediator in seven states and one U.S. territory. Dr. Bateman is the lead author of one of the primary books on special education dispute resolution (Bateman et al., 2023) and is the co-author of one of the most widely visited blogs on special education legal issues. He restructured the special education complaint system for Guam. He is a frequent keynote speaker for not only state special education administration conferences, but also conferences for families of students with disabilities.
After the Endrew F. Supreme Court decision in 2017, Dr. Bateman developed a module for administrators on legally compliant IEPs for the U.S. Department of Education which received its “stamp of approval” as legally compliant. He also provided extensive guidance for the module developed for classroom teachers. He recently (2024) co-authored the fourth edition of the leading textbook for principals related to special education. He coauthored the leading textbook on IEP development (Yell et al., 2022), coauthored the recent special edition of TEACHING Exceptional Children on legally compliant IEPs (Yell & Bateman, 2020), and has helped rewrite and lead the trainings on new IEPs and procedures for multiple states and U.S. territories. He authored a document on how to write a 504-plan that is being used in 48 states and two territories. He was the lead author on the American Association of School Administrators policy brief Rethinking Special Education Dispute Resolution at IDEA’s 50th Anniversary. Recently, he was the neutral factfinder in the class action lawsuit against the Oregon Department of Education relating to special education services.
He is a former special education classroom teacher and building-level administrator, and the parent of two adult children—one who had an IEP in school and the other who had a Section 504 plan.
Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Challenge to Virginia’s IDEA Due Process Hearing System The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in D.C. v. Fairfax County School Board on October 5, 2026, leaving the Fourth Circuit’s decision in place. What Was the Legal Issue? The plaintiffs alleged systemic deficiencies in Virginia’s IDEA […]
The Center for Appropriate Dispute Resolution in Special Education (CADRE) has released its October 2026 report, Trends in Dispute Resolution Under the IDEA: 2024–25 (SY 2024). Drawing on data released by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in September 2026, the report provides an important […]
As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to begin its October 2026 Term, two special education cases are asking the Justices to step in. The cases could hardly be more different. One, D.C. v. Fairfax County School Board, comes directly out of the IDEA’s dispute-resolution system and asks whether families alleging systemic violations must […]
Parallel Learning would like to invite SPEDLAWBlog.com readers to The Special Education Case Files, a free 3-Part virtual workshop hosted by Julie Weatherly. The series will cover the kinds of legal and operational challenges district leaders face every day and share practical strategies you can put to work immediately. The […]
Critical Questions Districts and IEP Teams Must Address Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are rapidly finding their way into special education practice. Teachers and administrators, often overwhelmed by documentation demands and growing caseloads, may view AI as a promising way to reduce paperwork and generate present levels of academic achievement and […]
School districts should treat devices such as Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses and similar wearable AI-enabled glasses the same way they treat cell phones or unauthorized electronic testing aids during state assessments. The issue is no longer just texting or internet access. These devices can: Record audio and video Livestream Receive […]
The Fourth Circuit’s decision in D.C. v. Fairfax County School Board, No. 23-1854 (4th Cir. 2026), is a direct and unambiguous reminder of a principle that continues to control special education litigation: if the substance of a claim is the denial of a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), the Individuals with […]
Special education leadership right now feels like triage. Backlogs. Staffing gaps. Compliance pressure. Parent concerns. Escalating needs. And all of it happening while you’re trying to build systems that actually work. If you’re a special education director, coordinator, or district leader, you don’t need more theory. You need structure. Tools. […]
District Decision Tree: Cell Phone Bans & Students with Disabilities Purpose:To ensure any cell phone restriction complies with IDEA, Section 504, and ADA, preserves access to FAPE, and avoids predictable legal exposure. For every student who needs an exception, there should be a meeting. If the student is on an IEP, […]
This is part one of a two-part blog post on cell phone bans. This part talks about all the ways cell phones are used as assistive technology. Part two, which is in the process of being written, will describe a decision tree for districts on how to determine if a […]
The confusion here is far more conceptual than legal. Short answer: No. IDEA does not require that an “AT evaluation” or “AT assessment” be listed as a discrete item on a Permission to Evaluate (PTE) or Permission to Reevaluate (PTR) in every case. A district is not out of compliance simply because it uses a consultation-based, […]
