Assistive Technology for Students With Disabilities

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 183-194
Author(s):  
Susan Larson Etscheidt
Keyword(s):  
Assistive Technology ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act

Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams are required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to consider a student’s need for assistive technology (AT). Despite this legal requirement, AT supports are often not available to students with disabilities. Many students with disabilities and their families have addressed the failure to consider and provide AT supports through litigation. The purpose of this article is to examine the case law pertaining to the assessment, selection, and provision of AT learning supports for students with disabilities. A legal analysis was conducted to determine litigation themes. Based on these results, several recommendations for IEP teams are proposed.

Perspectives on the Future of IDEA

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L. Hardman ◽  
John McDonnell ◽  
Marshall Welch
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Restrictive Environment

Since its original passage in 1975 as Public Law 94-142, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has been the cornerstone of practice in special education. This federal law has enabled all eligible students with disabilities to access a free and appropriate public education. During the past 2 years, the 104th Congress has debated vigorously some of the law's basic tenets (e.g., definition of disability, content of the individualized education plan [IEP], parental rights to attorneys, fees, discipline, and placement). The basic requirements of the law remain intact and continue to shape the scope and content of special education. This article addresses whether or not the assumptions upon which IDEA is based remain valid as we approach the 21st century. We critique these assumptions within the context of four requirements of IDEA: (a) eligibility and labeling, (b) free and appropriate public education, (c) the individualized education program (IEP), and (d) the least restrictive environment. Recommendations for changes in existing law relative to each of the above requirements are presented.

Mothers' Perceptions of Satisfaction, Trust, and Power in the Individualized Education Program Process

Inclusion ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 247-262
Author(s):  
Belkis Choiseul-Praslin ◽  
Malarie E. Deardorff ◽  
Kristopher Hawk Yeager
Keyword(s):  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
School Partnerships ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Iep Meeting ◽  
Iep Process ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Iep Team

Abstract Parent involvement in the development of an individualized education program (IEP) is a foundational tenet of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Unfortunately, mothers, the parent most likely to attend the IEP meeting, often report negative perceptions and even feelings of disillusion with the IEP process. Including mothers as equal members of the IEP team is crucial to student success, especially for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). To determine the extent of mothers' satisfaction, trust, and perception of the power of the IEP process, we surveyed 929 mothers of students with disabilities. Survey results indicate mothers are neither overly satisfied nor dissatisfied with the process, but almost always perceive an imbalance of power between IEP team members. A high percentage of mothers reported experiences with bullying, coercion, and shame. The findings suggest that more efforts are needed to empower mothers during the IEP process and improve parent-school partnerships.

The Emperor Has No Clothes: Improving the Quality and Compliance of ITPs

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 146-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Greene
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Special Education Teachers ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Transition Plan ◽  
Age Appropriate ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Assessment Results

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA) requires that an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for students with disabilities, age 16 years and older, include age appropriate transition assessment results aligned with measurable postsecondary goals. This section of the IEP is typically known as an Individual Transition Plan (ITP). A recent investigation found a number of ITPs did not meet the requirements of the IDEA. To support special education teachers in writing IDEA-compliant ITPs, this article presents suggestions for developing quality ITPs with specific emphasis on transition assessment. Discussion includes potential explanations for the lack of quality in presenting transition assessment results, recommendations for conducting transition assessment, transition assessment resources, and examples of quality and IDEA-compliant ITPs.

Challenges Facing Successful Transition for Youths with E/BD

1998 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Maag ◽  
Antonis Katsiyannis
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Disorders ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Transition Services ◽  
Dropping Out ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
Successful Transition ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Poor Outcomes

In 1990, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act added a new mandate that the individualized education program for all students age 16 and older must include a statement of the transition services needed to prepare them for postschool activities. Providing transition services to youths with emotional or behavioral disorders (E/BD) has been particularly difficult because their problems are often intractable and, consequently result in poor outcomes such as dropping out of school, unemployment, incarceration, and psychopathology This article describes challenges involved in ensuring successful transition for youths with E/BD and makes recommendations for improving transition services.

Curricular Philosophies Reflected in Individualized Education Program Goals for Students With Complex Support Needs

2021 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 283-294
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Kurth ◽  
Elissa Lockman-Turner ◽  
Kathryn Burke ◽  
Andrea L. Ruppar
Keyword(s):  
General Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Severe Disabilities ◽  
Support Needs ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
General Education Curriculum ◽  
K 12

Abstract Individualized education program (IEP) goals are meant to be personalized to address the unique needs of students with disabilities, while also reflecting the student's grade-aligned general education curriculum. IEP goals describe what, how, and where students with disabilities are taught, and reflect the curriculum used to provide instruction. In this study, we analyzed how IEP goals align with the different curricular philosophies for students with severe disabilities. Using a sample of 88 IEPs for students with complex support needs (i.e., severe disabilities) in Grades K-12, we found most goals (57%) reflect curricular philosophies of the 1970s–1990s (i.e., developmental, functional, and social inclusion) eras, with only 26% of IEP goals representative of modern curricular philosophies (i.e., grade-aligned academic content). We also found secondary-aged students were less likely to have grade-aligned academic goals compared to elementary-aged students. We offer implications for ensuring individualization and goals reflecting skills needed for the 21st century.

Behavioral and Discipline Provisions of IDEA '97: Implicit Competencies Yet to Be Confirmed

2000 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl R. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Intervention Programs ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Functional Behavioral Assessments ◽  
The Status ◽  
Behavioral Assessments ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Performance Discrepancy

This article explores the status of implementation of the behavioral and discipline requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997. Data are presented from complaints, hearings, and court decisions related to the areas of functional behavioral assessments, manifestation determinations, individualized education program (IEP) behavioral planning, behavioral intervention programs, and alternative educational settings. The overall discrepancy between competency expectations for IEP teams and current performance appears significant at this time. Implications of this performance discrepancy are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document