Presentation on theme: " Special Education History. 1970 One of every five children with disabilities was allowed to attend public schools Many states had laws that prevented."— Presentation transcript:
Special Education History
1970 One of every five children with disabilities was allowed to attend public schools Many states had laws that prevented children that were deaf, blind, emotionally disturbed, or mentally retarded from attending schools.
Many of these children/adults lived in state run institutions. Children/adults received minimal food, clothing and shelter. The children/adults entered the institutions to be watched until they died.
Today about 200,000 infants, toddlers and their families receive services because of IDEA. About 6,000,000 school age children and youth are served through IDEA. 1973, part of a Rehabilitation bill Section 504 was born. Section 504 is not a program and 504 has no funds
What is the relationship between 504 and Special Education? Section 504 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education All Special Ed. Students are Section 504 students. But
Not all Section 504 students are Special Ed. Students. A student with asthma could be a 504 student but not special ed because the student is successful in the regular classroom and there is not a diagnosed educational need.
Many changes have come and are coming from the reauthorization of IDEA. A district may use 15% of their special ed. funding to help meet the needs of students that are not special ed students.
How Do You Lead When You’re not Sure What the Issues Are? What positions are required to attend an ARD? Who is the person in charge of the ARD?
Each member of the ARD committee serves an important purpose: The purpose of the ARD administrator is to: Ensure each member fills her/his role appropriately Mediate differences of opinion Make sure the parent is included in all discussions and decisions Commit the resources of the district to implementation of the agreed services, supports, goals and objectives.
If staff feels the ARD may be contentious: Staff the child prior to the ARD meeting During the staffing, listen to staff concerns Be sure the staff is going into the ARD meeting with one unified recommendation Anticipate the parent’s concerns and reactions with the staff Strategize how these concerns and reactions will handled
If no staffing is held (no contentious issues are anticipated) You will set the tone for the meeting by cordially greeting each member especially the parent Be sure the parent knows the name of each individual at the table Verify the purpose of the ARD meeting—annual review, reevaluation, placement, changes
Signal the diagnostician when you are ready for her to begin Watch throughout the meeting to ensure staff involve the parent in each discussion Read the parent’s body language-is the parent understanding the discussion, has the parent been included in the discussion Respond to what you see
At the end of the ARD meeting, be sure a staff member is assigned to carry-out each commitment made by the ARD committee Depending on the significance of the commitments made, instruct staff to report to you as they implement the commitments
To Assess or Not to Assess
An assessment is required Every 3 years If conditions warrant Teacher or parent request The scope of the assessment should be adapted to the presenting needs of the students.
It is not necessary to re-evaluate for existence of the disability at each 3 year re-evaluation Is the disability likely to have changed Is there at least 2 consecutive evaluations confirming the disability Example: A student determined to blind and receives services probably does not need new assessment every three years.
The purpose for not reassessing for eligibility is to conserve the resources of the district. IDEA ’97 acknowledged that it wastes money to continually reassess for eligibility when the disability is not likely to have changed Also a time factor
At What Grade Level is the Student Working What material is used to determine level of student work? Norm Reference Test—Criterion Reference Test, Classroom work Who determines the level of work—general ed. instructor or special ed. instructor?
Many children with disabilities function in certain academic areas at a different level from their designated grade level. The child’s functioning grade level can vary from academic area to academic area Diagnosticians, general ed teachers and special ed teachers each have different tools to determine functioning grade level. Sometimes these tools don’t agree.
Diagnostician tools for determining functional level include: Standardized IQ tests Standardized achievement tests Other standardized measures of performance These measures compare a child’s performance with a national normative sample Although a valuable tool, these tools may not accurately determine a child’s functioning grade level related to the TEKS.
General ed teacher tools for determining functional grade level include: Standardized group achievement scores Curriculum assessment Knowledge of their own grade level content Possible knowledge of same-subject content at other grade levels
These measures may give an accurate indication of grade level functioning related to the TEKS, particularly if the teacher is skilled in same-subject content at other grade levels
Special ed teacher tools for determining grade level functioning include: CLASS Competency Test Scores Curriculum assessments Possible knowledge of subject content at various grade levels These tools may give an accurate indication of functioning level on the TEKS, particularly if the teacher has strong knowledge of subject content at various grade levels.
Lesson Learned Of all the tools available to the ARD committee, the BEST indicators of the child’s functioning grade level relative to the TEKS is: TAKS Scores
During the ARD meeting, different staff may report conflicting information functioning grade level. This is confusing to parents who often simply want to know, “At what grade level is he reading?” or “At what grade level can he do math?”
If this happens, confidently assure the parent that each piece of information reported has a different purpose, but the BEST what to determine the level at which the child reads/does math is TAKS, TAKS-A, TAKS-M TAKS directly relates to the TEKS
Goals and Objectives—Mastery or Work in Progress?
At each annual ARD meeting, the ARD committee must review the goals and objectives adopted at previous ARD committee meeting Each goal MUST be mastered by the next annual ARD If the special ed teacher indicates any goals and objectives continue to be ‘work in progress’, you have a problem
Here is the problem IDEA ’97 states that annual goals must be written so that they can reasonably be mastered by the next annual ARD The teacher sends home an IEP Progress Report each 6 weeks. This report assures, among other things, that the student is on track for mastering the annual goals by the next annual ARD meeting. The teacher should have data to support the determination If the data indicates the child is NOT on track to meet one or more annual goals prior to the next annual ARD meeting, the ARD committee MUST reconvene and adjust the goals and objectives
Since the ARD administrator at the previous annual ARD meeting committed the resources of the district to ensure that among other things, the goals and objectives would be mastered by the next annual ARD, no goals and objectives should be noted as ‘work in progress’ at the new annual ARD
How should you address this problem? Don’t wait for an annual ARD meeting to discover the problem Meet with teachers NOW to ensure they understand that each annual goal must be mastered by the next annual ARD Ask teachers to verify to you each 6 weeks that every special ed student is on track to master each annual goal by the next annual ARD If it is reported a student is not on track, reconvene the ARD committee
At the reconvened ARD meeting Review the goals and objectives that are not on track for mastery Staff should come to the ARD with recommendations for revising the goals and objectives that can be mastered by the next annual ARD meeting This may mean rewriting the goals and objectives This may mean adjusting the mastery level of the goals and objectives to ensure the designated mastery level can be reached by the next annual ARD.
Mastery Level on the IEP designates the mastery level the ARD committee anticipates the child will reach on the goal/objectives by the next annual ARD It does not necessarily relate to the district-adopted ‘passing standard’ for general education students 70% may not be the correct mastery level for the ARD committee to set for some goals and objectives
TAKS, TAKS-A, TAKS-M and Expected Achievement.
NCLB has made this an even higher stakes issue than it was previously. The ARD committee MUST make sound decisions on which test the child will take and, if the child is to take TAKS, TAKS-A or TAKS-M what the instructional level and expected achievement level will be.
As the ARD administrator, you must ensure that ARD committee members are using relevant data to formulate this recommendation. ARD committee members should not formulate this recommendation based upon an educated guess, firm conviction, or a ‘gut feeling.’
ARD committee members, under your leadership, should use data! Data tools include: TEKS checks Benchmarks
TAKS vs TAKS-M vs TAKS-A —Consider the following questions: Is the student receiving TEKS instruction on grade level with no accommodations that would invalidate the TAKS? Is the student passing the general ed class? Is the student receiving TEKS instruction on grade level, but supportive instruction is provided in below grade level concepts to assist the student in mastering grade level concepts? Is the student receiving TEKS instruction below grade level? Is the student receiving TEKS instruction at any grade level in the testing area?
A child is receiving instruction in the TEKS at grade level, but the questions answered previously indicate that TAKS is not an appropriate measure of the student’s achievement. What is the decision?
Consensus, Non-consensus, and Chaos
Effectively there are only 2 parties present at an ARD meeting—the school and the parent. Consensus occurs when the school and parent are in agreement. Non-consensus occurs when the school and parent do not agree. Chaos occurs when various members of the schools do not agree!!
When consensus is achieved, the school goes forth and implements the agreed upon services, supports, goals and objectives. It is up to the principal to ensure that all agreed services, supports, goals and objectives are implemented. “I forgot to do that” will not survive a law suit.
When non-consensus appears possible, the ARD administrator does the following: Consider whether the school wants to recess the ARD meeting in order to gather additional information or consider other options. Offers the parent a recess (unless an AEP Placement is being discussed) for the purpose of gathering additional information or considering other options. Prior to recessing, schedules the date and time the ARD committee will reconvene within 10 days.
If non-consensus ultimately occurs, the administrator must; Give the parent an opportunity to write down what she/he is disagreeing with; Tell the parent that the school will implement its recommended services, supports, goals and objectives in 5 school days Direct staff to implement the school’s recommendations in 5 school days; Notify the special education office that non-consensus has taken place
AAn original ARD for first time placement that reaches a Non- Consensus level will not be implemented in five days!
Chaos occurs when various school staff disagree among themselves during an ARD meeting concerning an appropriate plan for the child. If you begin to sense prior to the ARD that this is likely to happen, a pre-ARD should be scheduled to review the issues so the staff can become unified behind one recommendation.
Your goal at the pre-ARD is not to dictate staff agreement, but to facilitate staff agreement. You listen to the issues leading to disagreement; You assist staff in listening to each other and understanding each other’s point of view; You ensure each staff member is considering the needs of the student in light of all the data in hand; You facilitate staff coming to a unified recommendation.
If no pre-ARD takes place and the staff disagrees with each other during the ARD meeting, the administrator must step in and quickly mediate this dispute. “It appears we have conflicting recommendations on the table. Can we come together on this as a staff?” If the disagreement cannot be quickly mediated, the administrator should consider calling a brief recess so the staff can meet without the parent present in order to develop one unified recommendation.
Under no circumstances should school staff be allowed a prolonged disagreement during the ARD committee meeting in front of the parent.
Effective ARD Administrators Facilitate ARD; Include parents; Unify ARD committee members behind data- based decisions; Commit the district reasonably and responsibly.
A member of the ARD committee should not leave during the meeting if they are required to sign the decision page!!!!!!!!!!! Brief recess: Rest room break, emergency “We will take a 10 minute break.” Long recess: Usually a non-consensus issue. “This ARD will reconvene within 10 school days.” Do you have to set a date at that time?
Speech only PPCD Resource Content mastery OT PT VH MT OHI Autistic Orthopedic HI Dyslectic 504
Local Special Education Director
Check your district Student Code of Conduct Book. 1/pol.cfm?DisplayPage=FOF(LEGAL).pdf&Query Text=SPECIAL%20ED%20DISCIPLINE 1/pol.cfm?DisplayPage=FOF(LEGAL).pdf&Query Text=SPECIAL%20ED%20DISCIPLINE