Teachers Competency Elements of Special Education Integrated Program for National Type Schools in Johor, Malaysia on Implementation of Individual Education Plan

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Boyd

Background: The Individual Education Plan (IEP) and related resource documents shape the lived realities of children in special education programs. Although these documents aim to assist children in achieving their educational goals, a point of disjuncture can exist between the documents’ intentions and the actual experiences of children. Addressing this issue is crucial in order to prevent inequality and to foster educational development and social well being for children. Purpose: This study explores the discursive construction of children in IEP resource documents in order to illuminate the underlying implications of the language comprising these texts. Method: Data was collected by gathering IEP resource documents from the Ontario Ministry of Education website. Discourse analysis was then employed to examine the presence of the equative and attributive models, the passive voice, and the possessive construction. Lastly, disability theory was used to explore how these language practices conceptualize children. Results: The data set included zero instances of the equative model, an infrequent use of the attributive model, and a strong presence of both the passive voice and the possessive construction. These findings contributed to representations of children as exceptional, passive, and subordinate despite an explicit attempt to resist such conceptions. Conclusion: This study serves as a model through which the language practices of other special education documents can be critically evaluated, and offers potential avenues for creating documents that avoid disabling children further.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Boyd

Background: The Individual Education Plan (IEP) and related resource documents shape the lived realities of children in special education programs. Although these documents aim to assist children in achieving their educational goals, a point of disjuncture can exist between the documents’ intentions and the actual experiences of children. Addressing this issue is crucial in order to prevent inequality and to foster educational development and social well being for children. Purpose: This study explores the discursive construction of children in IEP resource documents in order to illuminate the underlying implications of the language comprising these texts. Method: Data was collected by gathering IEP resource documents from the Ontario Ministry of Education website. Discourse analysis was then employed to examine the presence of the equative and attributive models, the passive voice, and the possessive construction. Lastly, disability theory was used to explore how these language practices conceptualize children. Results: The data set included zero instances of the equative model, an infrequent use of the attributive model, and a strong presence of both the passive voice and the possessive construction. These findings contributed to representations of children as exceptional, passive, and subordinate despite an explicit attempt to resist such conceptions. Conclusion: This study serves as a model through which the language practices of other special education documents can be critically evaluated, and offers potential avenues for creating documents that avoid disabling children further.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-20
Author(s):  
Michael V. Pregot

In this study, research centered on the degree to which principals felt knowledgeable about basic generic leadership as well as special education functions. Current principals were selected from the 2018 state DOE databases from five states—Georgia, New York, Michigan, Vermont, and Oregon representing a wide demographic base. Ten (10) functions were generic leadership functions such as budget preparation or evaluating teachers while ten (10) others were related to special education such as authorship of Individual Education Plan (IEP’s) or Response to Intervention (RTI) strategies. Data suggest that a moderate difference exists with higher ratings attributed to generic leadership functions.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 750-751
Author(s):  

According to the US Department of Education, 4.36 million children in the United States (more than 11% of children 3 to 21 years of age) received some special education services during the 1984/1985 school year.1 Therefore, it is likely that a sizeable percentage of children seen in a pediatric practice for initial evaluation and follow-up care will have a developmental disability that requires an individual education plan. Pediatricians must understand the importance of such a plan and be aware of their role in its development, implementation, and interpretation. BACKGROUND Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, was intended as an educational bill of rights for handicapped children, guaranteeing them a free and appropriate education. The law required identification, diagnosis, education, and related services for children 5 to 18 years of age. In 1977, the age range was extended to include children between 3 and 21 years, with services for children between the ages of 3 and 5 years remaining optional. Not only were these services to be provided, but states were encouraged to seek out handicapped children who had not been previously served. Public Law 99-457, the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1986, further extends the range of the law by mandating services for children 3 to 5 years of age. This new law also provides funding for states to voluntarily develop programs that serve infants and toddlers (birth to 3 years of age) who are at risk for or are suspected of having handicapping conditions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document