Special Education Leadership and the Implementation of Response to Intervention

High Stakes ◽

Special Education Leadership ◽

Idea 2004 ◽

Effective Leaders ◽

Special education administrators provide leadership to guide the identification of learners with exceptionalities and ensure that staff working with special education students delivers instructional best practice. In order to execute these responsibilities, special education administrators must be effective leaders who collaborate with a variety of stakeholder including. Contrary to their general education counterparts, special education administrators must possess a specific body of procedural knowledge to identify low-performing groups of students. These procedures are often referred to Response to Intervention (RTI) or Multi-Tier Systems of Support (MTSS). Under IDEA (2004), students with and without disabilities can benefit from the same system of interventions and supports. This intersection has necessitated coordination of RTI models by both general and special education administrators. Special education and general education leaders will be challenged to blend models of leadership to address the high-stakes environment in our K-12 schools.

Exploring factors related to access to general education contexts for students with intellectual disability: a survey of district special education administrators in one state

International Journal of Inclusive Education ◽

10.1080/13603116.2020.1818140 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-19

Author(s):

Julia M. White ◽

Meghan Cosier ◽

Qiu Wang

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

Intellectual Disability ◽

General Education ◽

A Policy Study of P. L. 94–142

Council review ◽

10.1177/001440298104800104 ◽

1981 ◽

Vol 48 (1) ◽

pp. 24-33 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Lee M. Joiner ◽

David A. Sabatino

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

General Education ◽

Special Education Teachers ◽

Regular Educators ◽

Special Education Policy ◽

Middle Range ◽

Level Of Consciousness ◽

Policy Statements ◽

The study sought to determine the “level of consciousness” of selected regular and special educators for 50 competing educational policy statements. Fifty of the most frequently occurring policy items were selected, 20 arising as key concepts of the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act (P.L. 94–142), intermingled with 30 of the most pressing issues drawn from the current regular (general) and vocational education literature. A Q-sort procedure required 199 general and special education teachers and administrators to prioritize the general and special education policy items, sorting them according to their importance. A discriminant functions analysis disclosed that respondents could be correctly classified as special or regular educators with 68% accuracy (cross-validated) on the basis of their level of consciousness for 11 P.L. 94–142 policy items. Special education administrators demonstrated the highest level of consciousness, general education administrators the lowest, and teachers the middle range.

The Role of Council of Administrators of Special Education

Council review ◽

10.1177/001440297904600107 ◽

1979 ◽

Vol 46 (1) ◽

pp. 42-48

Author(s):

Jack Lamb ◽

Leonard C. Burrello

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

Least Restrictive Environment ◽

Handicapped Children ◽

Administrative Position ◽

Delivery Of Services ◽

Restrictive Environment ◽

This article describes the role of the Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE) in their support of special education administrators in the context of the aftermath of P. L. 94-142. The forces and factors that are affecting the role incumbent in the special education administrative position are presented in ways in which CASE is attempting to serve its membership in a period of disequilibrium and change. The article is based upon both solicited and unsolicited comments from administrators from around the country. It highlights past and future activities that CASE is seeking to develop and implement in support of leadership persons in delivery of services of all handicapped children in the least restrictive environment.

Assessment in Special Education: Administrators’ Perspectives

Diagnostique ◽

10.1177/1534508484010001-412 ◽

1984 ◽

Vol 10 (1-4) ◽

pp. 161-175

Author(s):

Virginia L. Dixon ◽

David E. Greenburg

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

Performance Evaluation of Special Education Administrators: Considerations and Recommendations

NASSP Bulletin ◽

10.1177/019263659808259406 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 82 (594) ◽

pp. 24-32 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Lewis R. Johnson

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

Performance Evaluation ◽

A Statewide Survey of Special Education Administrators Regarding Mandated Prereferral Interventions

Remedial and Special Education ◽

10.1177/074193259201300410 ◽

1992 ◽

Vol 13 (4) ◽

pp. 34-39 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

J. Ron Nelson ◽

Deborah J. Smith ◽

Lonnie Taylor ◽

John M. Dodd ◽

Ken Reavis

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

Prereferral Interventions ◽

Response to Intervention

Education ◽

10.1093/obo/9780199756810-0075 ◽

2013 ◽

Author(s):

Amy Eppolito ◽

Kathryn White ◽

Janette Klingner

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Special Education ◽

Learning Disabilities ◽

Response To Intervention ◽

General Education ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

The United States ◽

Data Driven ◽

Data Driven Decision Making ◽

Rti Model

Response to intervention (RTI) is a comprehensive, systematic approach to teaching and learning designed to monitor academic and behavioral progress for all students, provide early interventions of increasing intensity to struggling learners, and potentially identify learners with more significant learning disabilities. The model is implemented with multitiered instruction, intervention, and assessment. The key components of the RTI model include (1) high-quality instruction matched to the needs of students, (2) evidence-based interventions of increasing intensity, (3) ongoing progress monitoring, and (4) data-driven decision making. Components of the model, such as data-driven decision making and multitiered instruction, have been studied for the past few decades, but the model as an integrated whole has been developed more recently. One catalyst for increased research and interest in RTI has been a change in federal legislation in the United States. The most recent reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) in 2004 permits the RTI model to be implemented as an alternative means to identify students with learning disabilities (LDs). These amendments to IDEA stipulate that the RTI process may be used to determine if a child is responding to research-based instruction and intervention as part of the special education evaluation process. Although driven by special education policy, RTI has been lauded as an instructional model that can improve general education overall and for special populations. However, critiques of the model argue that it has been implemented with limited research, resources, and funding and may not be valid for identifying LDs. Some experts question the psychometric validity of the model and promote using multiple forms of assessment, including more traditional standardized psycho-educational tests, in combination with RTI when evaluating students for possible LDs.

Transition and other Services for Handicapped Students in Local Education Agencies

Council review ◽

10.1177/001440298905500405 ◽

1989 ◽

Vol 55 (4) ◽

pp. 315-320 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

James S. Fairweather

Keyword(s):

Special Education ◽

Vocational Programs ◽

Employment Opportunities ◽

Related Services ◽

Adult Services ◽

Local Education ◽

Education Agencies ◽

Education Administrators ◽

Local Education Agencies

A survey was conducted among special education administrators in 1,450 local education agencies (LEAs) nationwide, to determine the availability of vocational programs and transition-oriented services for handicapped youth. Results showed that most LEAs offer at least some vocational programs; transition-oriented services are not as frequently available, particularly in smaller LEAs. In addition to size of LEA, community employment opportunities and the availability of adult services were related to whether an LEA offered any transition-related services.