Parents as Partners in the Special Education Process

2016 ◽  
pp. 263-276
Author(s):  
Cynthia Sistek-Chandler
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Individual Education Plan ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Education Services ◽  
Education Experience ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Special Education Process ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Education

The purpose of this chapter is to provide Pre-K through college educators, parents, and administrators who are involved with special education, insight into the processes and procedures from the perspective of a parent. The parent's perspective and involvement with their special needs child is critical in shaping the lifelong, special education experience. The literature and research shows a strong correlation to student success when parents are actively involved in this process. Rooted in the federal and state guidelines from the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), all students are entitled to education services from birth through age 21. Recommendations for the Individual Education Plan process as well as strategies for navigating special education services are revealed in this narrative.

Parents as Partners in the Special Education Process

2019 ◽  
pp. 1610-1623
Author(s):  
Cynthia Sistek-Chandler
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Individual Education Plan ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Education Services ◽  
Education Experience ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Special Education Process ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Education

The purpose of this chapter is to provide Pre-K through college educators, parents, and administrators who are involved with special education, insight into the processes and procedures from the perspective of a parent. The parent's perspective and involvement with their special needs child is critical in shaping the lifelong, special education experience. The literature and research shows a strong correlation to student success when parents are actively involved in this process. Rooted in the federal and state guidelines from the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), all students are entitled to education services from birth through age 21. Recommendations for the Individual Education Plan process as well as strategies for navigating special education services are revealed in this narrative.

scholarly journals Under-Identification of Students with Long Term Disability from Moderate to Severe TBI:

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-25
Author(s):  
Drew A Nagele ◽  
Stephen R. Hooper ◽  
Kristin Hildebrant ◽  
Melissa McCart ◽  
Judy Dettmer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Medical Systems ◽  
Special Education Eligibility ◽  
Education Services ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Severe Tbi ◽  
State Child ◽  
Education Act

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is a special education eligibility category under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Unlike other special education categories (e.g., autism, specific learning disabilities), relatively few students with TBI are identified for special education nationwide compared to the known prevalence of TBI. Discrepanies between TBI hospitalization data, estimates of long-term disability due to TBI, and the number of students identified under the TBI category were analyzed. Only 33% of students projected to have moderate to severe TBI were represented in state child counts using the IDEA TBI category. Possible explanations for these discrepancies were explored, including that students with TBI are not referred for special education services, students are served under other special education categories, communications between medical systems-school systems are limited, and that students may not manifest difficulty until years after injury. Potential solutions to improve TBI identification for special education services are presented.

How to Survive a Due Process Hearing

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-12
Author(s):  
Carl Corbin
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Education Services ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Educational Professionals ◽  
Due Process Hearing ◽  
Education Act

Abstract Background/Introduction: Due process hearings are administrative hearings that resolve disputes between parents of children, who qualify for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), and a Local Educational Agency (“LEA”). The IDEA provides that students that qualify for special education services are entitled to receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”). A FAPE has both substantive and procedural requirements. The process by which a LEA details the provision of a FAPE to a student who qualifies for special education services is through the development of an Individualized Education Program (“IEP”). Objectives: This article reviews the process to develop a legally defensible IEP. This article provides strategies for LEAs and educational professionals to avoid a due process hearing. This article provides a brief description of and timelines associated with a due process hearing. This article provides suggestions to educational professionals who may be called to testify as a witness at a due process hearing. Conclusion: LEAs and educational professionals can minimize their risk of having to undergo a due process hearing and can maximize their chances to prevail at a due process hearing through preparation and training.

scholarly journals Triennial Evaluations: Divorcing the Means from the Ends

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 314
Author(s):  
Frederick J. Brigham ◽  
Christopher M. Claude ◽  
John William McKenna
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Instructional Program ◽  
Individual Education Plans ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Full Inclusion ◽  
Education Services ◽  
Special Education Process ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Local Education Agencies ◽  
Education Process

Confusion among stakeholders regarding some aspects of the special education process—chiefly the triennial reevaluation—leads to misapplication of rules across districts and states based on interpretations of informal lore-based reasoning. Local education agencies (LEA) can determine that no additional data are needed and advise parents to forego the evaluation. Too, often, families who fear losing special education services for their child will acquiesce and decline the evaluation. Although this may be appropriate for some students, for others it can be a highly questionable and counterproductive decision. We illustrated the ways that avoiding triennial evaluations could hamper the ability of the LEA to adequately foster the student’s independence, monitor the student’s disability condition, and set and reach the student’s Individual Education Plans (IEP) goals. We argued that the major issue in decisions regarding triennial evaluations is centered on determining if a student is still eligible for special education services. This places too much attention on test-based eligibility and too little on educational needs, transition needs, and the instructional program. Triennial reevaluations should pivot from an “eligibility” focus to a “needs” focus, allowing schools and parents to gain a fresh understanding of the individual receiving the services. Failure to do so raises questions about the fidelity of assessment within the structure of special education service provision. Finally, we suggested that the motives underlying the practices for triennial evaluations illustrated here call the pragmatic acceptability of “full inclusion” into question.

The Fight Within: Parent-Educators Advocating for their Children with Autism Inside their Own School Districts

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-177
Author(s):  
Keri C. Fogle ◽  
David Hoppey ◽  
David H. Allsopp
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
School Partnerships ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Educational Rights ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Parent Educators

Parents have advocated for the educational rights of their children with disabilities for decades, and more so since the reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Advocating for one’s child while working as an employee in the same school district where your child receives special education services comes with unforeseen complexities. Using a heuristic case study approach, this inquiry intended to discern the experiences, barriers, and perceptions of job security of two parent-educators with children with autism. Findings suggest unanticipated experiences and challenges within their dual, parent-educator role as indicated by the theory of responsible advocacy. Perceived employment consequences related to advocating from within the school system are also discussed along with implications for such parent-educators and their role in improving parent–school partnerships in special education.

scholarly journals Disabling language practices: discursive constructions of children in individual education plan resource documents

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Individual Education Plan ◽  
Educational Goals ◽  
Language Practices ◽  
Passive Voice ◽  
Data Set ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Education ◽  
Education Plan

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.

scholarly journals Disabling language practices: discursive constructions of children in individual education plan resource documents

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Individual Education Plan ◽  
Educational Goals ◽  
Language Practices ◽  
Passive Voice ◽  
Data Set ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Education ◽  
Education Plan

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.

What Happens to Students Leaving Secondary Special Education Services in Arizona?

1997 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 261-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura L. Love ◽  
Ida M. Malian
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Transition Services ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Education Services ◽  
Analysis Technique ◽  
Students First ◽  
Education Act ◽  
The Impact

The Arizona Follow-along Project assessed the impact of special education on the education and postschool outcomes of students with disabilities who had exited from special education services. Using the Oregon follow-along method with a computer-assisted telephone interview and data analysis technique resulted in a system-wide approach to interviewing students, parents, and teachers of individuals who had left special education. The results of the students' first year out of high school are reported in this article, and implications for educational programming and transition services are discussed. Statewide system changes in policies and procedures are recommended in light of the transition services mandates specified in the individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document