Search results1 – 10 of over 6000
There is a concerning disparity between students with disabilities and their peers without disabilities in their long-term, postsecondary outcomes. The former group tends…
There is a concerning disparity between students with disabilities and their peers without disabilities in their long-term, postsecondary outcomes. The former group tends to have a variety of poorer outcomes in important domains of life, such as employment, postsecondary education, independent living, and community participation. Policymakers, scholars, and the general public alike have called attention to this issue, resulting in both legal mandates and research on evidence-based practices in the area of transition services. While the law requires individualized, results-oriented transition services based upon age-appropriate transition assessment and a number of evidence-based transition practices and predictors have been identified, studies of individualized education programs and practices have revealed a significant underuse of best practices in transition assessment and services. In this chapter, we discuss the importance of comprehensive transition assessment as a foundation for setting postsecondary goals and designing services that best fit individual student strengths and needs and best prepare students to be successful in their adult lives. Further, we provide an overview of current recommendations for best practices in planning, conducting, and interpreting transition assessments, and offer suggestions for areas where further research is needed.
In the United States, the mandate to provide access to general education curriculum standards for all learners is clear. This chapter provides an overview and a framework…
In the United States, the mandate to provide access to general education curriculum standards for all learners is clear. This chapter provides an overview and a framework for making individualized and curriculum choices for learners with low-incidence disabilities and cognitive deficits. Topics covered include reconciling an ecological curriculum model with a standards-based framework and an expanded discussion on embedding individualized learning targets within the ongoing lessons, routines, and activities of inclusive classrooms. Carefully planned and implemented embedded instruction can provide a match between a student’s need for individualized instruction and the everyday practices of inclusive classrooms.
During the last decade, school districts throughout the United States have implemented inclusion programs utilizing a variety of models. A growing number of school…
During the last decade, school districts throughout the United States have implemented inclusion programs utilizing a variety of models. A growing number of school districts are including all students with disabilities, even those with severe disabilities, into general education classrooms (Thousand & Villa, 1990). Although the term inclusion has no legal definition, and has been interpreted by educational professionals in a variety of ways, the concept has been in existence under the least restrictive environment (LRE) provision of PL 94-142, The Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975, PL 101-476, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 and most recently within PL 105-17, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments (IDEA) of 1997. According to IDEA (1997), public education agencies are required to ensure that: to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and that special classes, separate schooling or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily [Authority 20 U.S.C. 1412 (a) (5)].The concept of inclusion has been defined in various ways within the literature. Catlett and Osher (1994) reviewed policy statements of professional organizations and found at least seven different definitions for inclusion. Currently, in education, inclusion is the term used when students with disabilities are placed in general education classrooms for a portion of the school day (Falvey et al., 1995b). The term inclusion is differentiated from mainstreaming. Mainstreaming refers to the placement of students with disabilities in general education classrooms with appropriate instructional support (Meyen, 1990). When students are mainstreamed, they are usually prepared prior to placement into general education and are expected to “keep up” with the general classroom expectations (Rogers, 1993). Students with disabilities who are mainstreamed receive the same or nearly the same curriculum as general education students and are expected to “fit” into the general curriculum and classroom. On the other hand, within inclusive programs, the general education teacher is expected to make adaptations to provide a suitable environment for students with disabilities. Within the literature on inclusion, there are a variety of interpretations of the definition of inclusion (e.g. Gartner & Lipsky, 1987; Rogers, 1993; Stainback & Stainback, 1984). For the purposes of this chapter, inclusion is defined as programs in which students with disabilities (with the exception of gifted) are eligible for special education, have an individualized education program (IEP), and receive their education in general education classrooms using different, modified, and/or additional curricula from students without disabilities. This definition of inclusion is similar to “selective inclusion” as described by Zionts (1997). Selective inclusion refers to partial general education class placement of students with disabilities (Zionts). The assumption that this definition is based on is that general education is not always appropriate for every student; some students may benefit by receiving individualized services in addition to general education.
Students with learning disabilities are a large part of the population of students with disabilities as well as the total student body. In fact, for many students the…
Students with learning disabilities are a large part of the population of students with disabilities as well as the total student body. In fact, for many students the general education classroom is where most of these students acquire their content knowledge. This, however, is not the only school placement in which students can receive services. This chapter will describe the historical perspectives regarding placement of students with learning disabilities. Next, it will compare the different instructional settings and interventions that have been effective for these individuals. The impact of the individualized education program will be discussed as well as controversial issues regarding the placement of these students. After reading this chapter readers will have a better understanding of placement issues surrounding students with learning disabilities.
In the United States, a child with a disability is vested with the statutory right to a free appropriate public education. Public school districts fulfill this right with…
In the United States, a child with a disability is vested with the statutory right to a free appropriate public education. Public school districts fulfill this right with an individualized education program designed to address the educational needs of the child. As with all governmental programs designed to extend positive benefits, statutory rights to a free appropriate public education come with attendant and commensurate costs that must be paid by the taxpayer. Rights have costs, and while the rights may be absolute, the remedy to a rights deficiency is subject to political processes. To borrow from Ronald Dworkin’s famous aphorism, costs and politics ultimately trump the right to a free appropriate public education.
Federal and state laws exert an important influence on the education of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. The most important of these laws is the…
Federal and state laws exert an important influence on the education of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. The most important of these laws is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. States and school districts must adhere to the requirements of IDEA when educating students with disabilities in special education programs. In addition to IDEA, other federal and state laws also affect special education programs for students with EBD. Two other important areas are laws that address (a) supervisory responsibilities of teachers of students with emotional and behavioral disorders and (b) issues of bullying in schools. The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and to examine the ways that this and other important laws affect the education of students with EBD and their teachers.
In this chapter we consider the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act’s (IDEA 2004) provision that requires that students’ special education services in…
In this chapter we consider the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act’s (IDEA 2004) provision that requires that students’ special education services in their individualized education programs be based on peer-reviewed research (PRR). We begin by reviewing federal legislation (i.e., Educational Sciences Reform Act, 2002, IDEA 2004; No Child Left Behind Act, 2001; Reading Excellence Act, 1998), which influenced the PRR principle and eventually the PRR language in IDEA. Next, we examine the US Department of Education’s interpretation of PRR in IDEA 2004 and review administrative hearings and court cases that have further clarified the PRR requirement. Finally, we make recommendations for teachers and administrators working to meet the PRR requirement when developing intervention plans for students with disabilities.
Ensuring that young children with severe and multiple disabilities are active participants in all aspects of their lives and that they make meaningful progress toward…
Ensuring that young children with severe and multiple disabilities are active participants in all aspects of their lives and that they make meaningful progress toward valued life outcomes can be a daunting endeavor for families and early educators. In this chapter, we describe evidence-based strategies that can be harnessed to ensure that each child is provided with high-quality inclusive education. Initially, we lay the foundation for the chapter by asserting shared assumptions fundamental to early childhood/early childhood special education practices with topics including strengths-based approach, self-determination, all does mean all, and play as a right for all children. Next, components of a high-quality inclusive program for young children designed to support access, participation, and meaningful progress are described. These components include the following: (1) collaborative teaming; (2) family–professional partnerships; (3) authentic assessment linked to meaningful outcomes; (4) discipline-free, functional outcomes or goals; (5) responsive, developmentally appropriate environments; and (6) levels of instructional support (e.g. universal design for learning (UDL), differentiation, and individualization). A vignette is used to further illustrate how to apply the practices discussed.
This chapter presents the personal perspectives of the author on issues related to methodology in teaching children with learning disabilities and to the role of…
This chapter presents the personal perspectives of the author on issues related to methodology in teaching children with learning disabilities and to the role of methodology in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Additionally, problems schools have had in implementing IDEA are highlighted and proposals offered to alleviate those difficulties.
The chapter examines school administrator responsibilities to special education students and their families from case scenarios based on conflicts between parents and…
The chapter examines school administrator responsibilities to special education students and their families from case scenarios based on conflicts between parents and districts regarding services provided by schools to special education students. From these case studies based on real case law, readers are exposed to situations intended to pose questions as to whether administrators met their responsibility to ensure the rights of the special education students. Principals, superintendents, and special education administrators committed to work together to make their school environment and optimal place for children to learn. An equally important role for school administrators is to create and maintain cultures where faculty understand their advocacy role for all children, but in particular, those children most in need of support. Effective administrators hold themselves and other professionals in their district to high standards related to knowledge of school law, particularly special education school law; communication with parents and other professionals; and collaborations based on the value of what is best for the student. This chapter concludes with a section on ethical leadership or the values underlying administrative actions affecting individualized education program students, their families, and all students who are different whether due to socioeconomic status, cultural differences, or race.