The Central Issue
One of the clearest themes in this conversation is that many school-based IEPs and behavior plans are built on a misunderstanding of how behavior actually works. As Frances Shefter points out throughout the discussion, schools often respond as if students are calmly choosing their behavior and simply need more structure, more consequences, or more academic time.
Dr. Lisa Rieger challenges that assumption directly. Behavior—academic and social—is not a willpower issue. It is the result of brain function interacting with environment. When schools ignore that, they end up designing plans that look good on paper but don’t change outcomes.
Behavior Is Not a Choice Problem
A foundational idea Dr. Rieger emphasizes is that behavior emerges from the intersection of biology and context.
-
Biology includes attention regulation, emotional control, executive functioning, and stress responses.
-
Context includes classroom climate, adult reactions, routines, and whether the environment feels safe or threatening.
Schools don’t control a child’s neurology, but they do control the context. According to Frances, this is where many systems fail—they double down on compliance instead of adjusting the environment to support regulation and learning.
Why IEP Meetings Often Feel Hollow
Early in the discussion, Dr. Rieger describes a common IEP problem: teams can present evaluation data but struggle to explain what it means in real terms.
Key questions often go unanswered:
-
What specific skill could the child not perform?
-
What did that difficulty look like during a school day?
-
Why does this intervention match that need?
When those answers aren’t clear, the IEP becomes a collection of generic interventions rather than a targeted plan. As Frances notes, this is how students end up with more academic time when the real barrier is anxiety, executive functioning, or emotional regulation.
The “Plug-and-Play” Intervention Problem
Both Frances and Dr. Rieger return to the idea that many interventions are chosen because they are familiar, easy to document, or already built into district systems.
A meaningful plan should show a clear chain of logic:
-
Identified skill deficit
-
Chosen intervention
-
Reason the intervention should work
-
Way progress will be measured
Without that, schools are effectively asking families to trust a system that cannot explain its own reasoning.
Stress Shuts Down Thinking
Dr. Rieger explains that when a child’s stress response is activated, the thinking parts of the brain are not fully accessible. This makes common school responses—lecturing, questioning, reasoning—ineffective in the moment.
Frances highlights how often teachers interpret this as defiance or refusal, when in reality the student’s brain is operating in survival mode. Adult dysregulation only escalates the situation further, reinforcing the child’s perception that school is unsafe.
Perception Matters More Than Intent
A key insight from Dr. Rieger is that the brain filters experience through past associations. Two people can experience the same situation and walk away with completely different interpretations.
For many students with IEPs, school is loaded with negative filters: repeated failure, correction, judgment, and misunderstanding. Even when adults believe they are being supportive, a child’s brain may still register threat.
Frances underscores how damaging it is when schools respond to a child saying “I don’t feel safe” with “You are safe.” The brain does not change its perception just because an adult says it should.
Why Traditional Behavior Plans Fail
Both speakers are blunt about the limits of traditional behavior plans. Many focus on tracking mistakes rather than building skills.
These plans often:
-
Count infractions
-
Emphasize compliance
-
Reinforce failure narratives
Dr. Rieger explains that this approach contradicts how habits and behavior change actually occur. Instead of teaching new responses, it strengthens shame and negative identity, which further impairs regulation and learning.
A Brain-Aligned Alternative: Replacement Behaviors
Rather than asking students to simply stop a behavior, Dr. Rieger advocates for “when–then” planning:
-
When a specific fear or trigger appears
-
Then a practiced replacement behavior is used
Frances connects this directly to IEP quality: if executive functioning is the need, then the IEP should include direct instruction and repeated practice in those skills—not just expectations written as goals.
Habit change requires energy, reinforcement, and forgiveness for setbacks. Without that, plans collapse under real-life conditions.
Rethinking IEP Goals
One example discussed is goals like “the student will pay attention for ten minutes.” As Frances points out, this type of goal describes the problem rather than teaching a solution.
More meaningful goals focus on:
-
Recognizing distractions
-
Practicing regulation strategies
-
Building stamina over time
-
Learning how to recover after dysregulation
Specialized instruction must close the gap between the current skill level and the expectation—not just restate the expectation.
Simple Classroom Practices That Reduce Escalation
Dr. Rieger shares practical strategies that fit naturally into classrooms. One example discussed is allowing students to identify their state as “fizzy” (overstimulated) or “flat” (disengaged).
This approach:
-
Gives students language for internal states
-
Reduces power struggles
-
Allows regulation before instruction
-
Saves time lost to conflict
Frances emphasizes that these tools aren’t “one more thing,” but a different lens for understanding behavior.
Teaching Compliance Instead of Learning
The conversation also critiques how assignments are often designed. Many rubrics measure whether students followed instructions rather than whether they understood the material.
This disproportionately affects neurodivergent students, who may fixate on perfection and formatting instead of content. Both Frances and Dr. Rieger argue that learning should be evaluated by what a student understands—not how closely they conformed to a template.
Stress, Attendance, and Academic Performance
Dr. Rieger references research showing that attendance had little relationship to GPA, while repeated nurse visits were strongly associated with lower performance. The implication is that stress and emotional dysregulation—not absence—were driving academic difficulties.
Frances ties this to IEP eligibility disputes, especially for twice-exceptional students who earn strong grades but are barely able to attend school consistently. Academic performance alone does not reflect educational impact.
Parents as True Partners
A recurring theme is that lasting change requires partnership. Dr. Rieger notes that change in the brain depends on repetition, experience, and emotion. If families are excluded or only contacted for discipline issues, progress stalls.
Frances reinforces that parents should be informed collaborators, not passive signers of paperwork.
Questions Parents Can Ask That Shift the Meeting
Dr. Rieger suggests parents ask teams to explain their reasoning clearly:
-
What data led to this intervention?
-
What skill is it targeting?
-
What success has been seen with similar students?
-
How will progress be measured?
Frances notes that these questions reposition parents as engaged and thoughtful, rather than adversarial.
Shaping Perception at Home
One practical home strategy discussed is consistently asking children to name positive moments from their day. Over time, this trains the brain to notice more than just threats and failures.
Dr. Rieger explains that expectation shapes attention. When the brain knows it will need to recall positives, it starts searching for them.
Final Takeaway
As this conversation between Frances Shefter and Dr. Lisa Rieger makes clear, many struggles in special education aren’t caused by student deficits—they’re caused by systems that aren’t aligned with how the brain works.
When schools shift from compliance to capability, from punishment to skill-building, and from isolation to partnership, outcomes change. Until then, families will keep fighting the same battles, and students will keep paying the price.
If you are fighting a battle and need our help, don’t hesitate to click here and contact us.
