Myth - "Schools Should Present Unified Recommendations to Parents"
The Myth
Many school teams believe they should meet before the IEP meeting to align on recommendations, then present a unified front to parents. The thinking goes: if we disagree among ourselves, parents will be confused or will "play us against each other." Professional unity demonstrates competence and provides clear guidance.
Why This Myth Persists
This practice is deeply embedded in school culture. Pre-IEP meetings among staff are standard in many districts. The rationale seems sound—we should be on the same page before meeting with families.
Additionally, there's often administrative pressure to present unified recommendations, especially regarding expensive services or placement decisions. Schools worry about budget implications if teams recommend services too freely.
There's also concern about appearing unprofessional. We've been taught that disagreement suggests incompetence or poor teamwork.
The Reality
Pre-determining recommendations among staff and presenting a united front to parents isn't collaboration—it's excluding parents from the actual decision-making process.
Here's what's really happening when we do this:
We're making decisions without parents: The real discussion happens in the staff-only pre-meeting. By the time we meet with parents, decisions are already made. We're seeking their approval, not their input.
We're denying parents access to diverse perspectives: Maybe the general education teacher thinks the student could succeed in gen ed with more support, but the special education teacher disagrees, and the special education teacher "wins" in the pre-meeting. Parents never hear the general education teacher's perspective.
We're creating the very problem we're trying to avoid: When parents encounter a wall of predetermined agreement, they often become defensive, suspicious, or bring advocates—because they correctly perceive they're being shut out.
We're potentially suppressing important professional concerns: When pressure exists to "get on the same page," team members with differing views may stay silent rather than advocate for what they believe is right.
The Legal Issue
Under IDEA, parents are supposed to be equal members of the IEP team. When we make decisions in pre-meetings without parents, we're violating the spirit—and potentially the letter—of that requirement.
The IEP meeting is supposed to be where the team, including parents, reviews data, discusses options, and makes decisions together. If we've already made the decisions, we're not providing parents meaningful participation.
What Authentic Collaboration Looks Like
Share data and observations, not predetermined conclusions: Before the IEP meeting, staff can certainly share assessment results, progress monitoring data, and classroom observations. But save the "so what should we do about it?" discussion for when parents are present.
Be open about professional disagreement: If the speech therapist thinks a student needs three sessions a week but you've been providing two, share both perspectives with parents and discuss together what makes sense.
Think out loud during meetings: Instead of presenting finished recommendations, describe your thinking: "Based on what I'm seeing in the classroom, I'm wondering if... What do you think? Does that match what you see at home?"
Invite multiple perspectives: Encourage different team members to share their observations and ideas rather than having one person present the "team's" position.
Make decisions during the meeting: Actually use meeting time for discussion, problem-solving, and decision-making rather than just reporting decisions already made.
How to Shift This Practice
Restructure pre-meetings: If you must meet before the IEP meeting, use that time to organize data and information, clarify roles, and ensure everyone understands the student's current performance—not to decide what services to recommend.
Communicate with parents before the meeting: Share assessment results, data, and observations with parents ahead of time so they can come prepared to discuss, just like staff do.
Start meetings with open-ended questions: Begin with "Tell us how things have been going at home" or "What are your main concerns?" rather than "Here's what we're recommending."
Present options, not single recommendations: Instead of "We think he needs to move to the resource room," try "We've been discussing placement options. Let's talk about the pros and cons of different settings and what might work best."
Acknowledge uncertainty: It's okay to say "We're not sure what the right amount of service is. Let's discuss what we're seeing and what makes sense."
Model respectful disagreement: If a team member disagrees with a recommendation during the meeting, support that. "That's a good point. Let's discuss both perspectives."
Real-World Example
I once participated in a district where pre-IEP meetings were mandatory. The special education team would meet, decide on services and placement, write the IEP, and then present it to parents.
A new principal joined and questioned this practice. She asked: "If we've already decided everything, what's the point of the IEP meeting? Aren't parents supposed to be part of the decision-making?"
Initially, staff pushed back. "Parents will be confused if we don't give them clear recommendations." "We need to be efficient." "What if we recommend services we can't afford?"
The principal stood firm. She instituted a new approach: staff would prepare data and information but not draft goals or decide on services until the IEP meeting. Meetings would be genuine discussions.
The results? Initially messy—meetings took longer, staff felt uncertain, and some parents were surprised by the change in dynamic. But over time:
Parent complaints decreased dramatically
Relationships between families and schools improved
IEPs were more individualized because they incorporated parent expertise
Staff reported feeling less defensive in meetings
Due process filings dropped to near zero
Authentic collaboration was more work upfront, but it resulted in better outcomes and stronger partnerships.
Addressing Common Concerns
Q: "What if parents make unreasonable requests?"
A: Discuss why requests might or might not be appropriate based on the child's needs and data. You can say no to requests that aren't supported by the data, but do so through genuine discussion, not by presenting a pre-formed united front.
Q: "What if we can't afford what the child needs?"
A: IDEA requires appropriate services regardless of cost. If legitimate budget constraints exist, be transparent about them, but don't let budget drive educational decisions.
Q: "Won't meetings take much longer?"
A: Initially, perhaps. But authentic collaboration often prevents the lengthy conflicts that arise when parents feel excluded. And isn't meaningful participation worth the time?
Q: "What if team members disagree in front of parents?"
A: Good! That's normal and healthy. Model how professionals can disagree respectfully while working together to figure out what's best for the student.
Questions for Self-Reflection
Do we make actual decisions during IEP meetings, or are we presenting decisions already made?
If I have a different opinion from my colleagues, do I feel comfortable expressing it during the IEP meeting?
Do our meetings include genuine discussion and problem-solving, or just reporting?
Would parents say they felt like equal partners in decision-making?
Am I more concerned with presenting professional unity or with authentic collaboration?
The Bottom Line
Presenting unified recommendations might feel more comfortable and professional, but it undermines the collaborative process IDEA requires and that students deserve.
Real collaboration is sometimes messy. It involves diverse perspectives, genuine discussion, and making decisions together in real time. It requires us to be vulnerable enough to think out loud and disagree respectfully in front of parents.
But that messiness is where the best IEPs are born—in authentic dialogue among all team members, including parents, about what this specific student needs.
Tomorrow: Myth #3 - "IEP meetings are just for documentation." We'll talk about how to make meetings meaningful rather than bureaucratic box-checking exercises. See you then!
Nicolette Lesniak is an experienced special education leader and IEP Coach. She has presented at regional and national educational conferences for families and educators on the importance of collaboration and partnerships in improving student outcomes. You can contact her at hello@nicolettelesniak.com.
