Section 342.42. [Reserved]  

Notice of Recommended Assignment

The school district failed to provide an exceptional student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE), where its individualized education program (IEP) was procedurally deficient because a certified school psychologist was not part of the Multiple Disciplinary Team, the required cover pages of the IEP which detail the type of program being offered, the related services, the duration of the IEP, various services that needed to be considered and reviewed and the like were noticeably absent, no Notice of Recommended Assignment was ever proffered by the district to the family, and there is no evidence in the record that the district ever attempted to go to the student’s school in order to develop further the Comprehensive Evaluation Report (CER) through the use of its own psychologist and other staff, and where the CER and the IEP devised by the district also failed to meet substantive requirements because the degree of need in the CER were sketchy and thin, the IEP was vague, failed to address a means of handling the student’s emotional and behavioral disorders and contained immeasurable standards. Cumberland Valley School District v. Lynn T., 725 A.2d 215 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999).

‘‘Resource’’ versus ‘‘Part-Time’’

Because § 342.42 only describes general differences between resource and part-time classrooms, and because the record indicates genuine issues of material facts, it was an abuse of discretion to grant summary judgment to a school district which alleged that a teacher returned to the same position following a sabbatical when the teacher alleged she returned to a different type of classroom. Bellefonte Area School District v. Deak, 779 A.2d 1240 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001).