The Plaintiffs, as masters of the complaint, have pled their claims such that each claim required exhaustion of the IDEA’S administrative remedies. Ill The judgment of the district court is affirmed. 1 . The Honorable Sarah H. Hays, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 2 . For the first time on appeal, the Plaintiffs urge us to adopt a “relief-centered” test to determine whether claims are subject to the IDEA exhaustion requirement, assert claims of psychological harm, and characterize their claims as constitutional violations. We do not address these issues in this opinion. See, e.g., Lopez v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 690 F.3d 869, 875 (8th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). They also argue the court should rule whether
holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be asserted for the first time on appeal holding issues not raised to and ruled upon by the trial court are not preserved for appellate review holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal holding issues not raised before the district court are not preserved for appeal holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be raised for the first time before this court