Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act Research Articles

Preparing Special Educators and School Principals in Special Education Law: An Undervalued Area of Professional Training?

Although special education legal knowledge is central to educating students with disabilities, how two critical school professionals—special educators and school principals—garner such knowledge is unclear. This study identified gaps in the professional training for special educators and school principals by examining professional standards and common textbooks. After identifying 32 special education legal concepts, we used content analysis to determine the extent to which each concept was mentioned in professional standards and preservice textbooks (five in special education, six in principal preparation, and four in school law). Compared with special education textbooks (in which 68%–84% of special education legal concepts were mentioned), preservice principals received less information on special education law in their general textbooks (3%–13% of concepts mentioned), although gaps narrowed when examining school law textbooks (63%–81%). Special education and school law texts consistently included concepts related to the six pillars of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), as well as more specific concepts, such as discipline/behavior and related services. Rarely mentioned concepts were extended school year, resolution meetings, and compensatory services. We discuss training, research, and policy implications.

Implementation of Rtl as a Part of Multi-tiered Systems of Support: What Teachers, Administrators,Teacher Educators Need to Know

Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) is an outgrowth of Response to Intervention (RtI). The various systems of support for students and school communities provided through these programs are integral to modern education and embedded in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004. While there are many benefits to the implementation of MTSS and RtI, there are various obstacles that can hinder successful intervention programs. The absence of consensus across districts and states with respect to program development and implementation creates confusion. This article addresses considerations and concerns related to MTSS and RtI. Discussed are underlying principles, challenges to effective implementation, expertise and training of teachers, and usage for classification for special education services. The roles of general and special education teachers, administrators, and university preparation programs are examined, and recommendation providec

Increased Prescribing of Psychotropic Drugs or School-Based Services for Children with Disabilities? Associations of These Self-control-Boosting Strategies with Juvenile Violence at the State Level.

The increasing rates at which psychotropic drugs have been prescribed to children and adolescents in the USA in the last three decades (since the early 1990s) have prompted questions about whether this trend is associated with the "great American crime decline." Medicalization can be considered one of the strategies to remedy children's neuropsychological deficits and improve their self-control. Another possible remedy is school-based services for children with learning disabilities, mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004. Using state-level panel data analyses for years 1990-2014 (with the main focus on 2000-2014 outcomes), the current study estimates associations between these two developmental self-control remedies-medicalization and school-based services-and minor, moderate, and severe types of juvenile violence, while controlling for relevant covariates (both time-varying and time-invariant). The results of mixed-effects linear regression analyses accounting for powerful time trends show a strong association between increases in school-based services for children with learning disabilities and declines in all types of juvenile violence. Another strong and consistent finding that emerges in the analyses is the link between reductions in child poverty at the state level and decreases in juvenile violence, both contemporaneously and over time. Psychotropic drug prescribing to children (measured using Supplemental Security Income rolls of children with mental health conditions) exhibits inconsistent or insignificant effects. The findings of this study have substantial theoretical and policy implications and indicate the importance of strengthening school-based services for children with disabilities and reducing child poverty as essential violence prevention tools.

Restraint and Seclusion Procedures With Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Physical and mechanical restraints and seclusion are currently used as emergency procedures in public schools across the United States. Students who exhibit dangerous, aggressive, or self-injurious behaviors are more likely to be restrained or secluded in school. Since many students with autism spectrum disorder exhibit one or more of these behaviors, they are even more likely to be subjected to these restrictive interventions. Policy on restrictive interventions is not outlined in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004, the federal special education law, leaving states to determine their own policies. Issues surrounding current policy and law on restraint and seclusion, as well as recommendations, are discussed.

Educational Impact of Using the VISSIT to Determine Service Delivery Time of Itinerant Teachers of Students With Visual Impairments

High-quality education for students with visual impairments starts with service intensity determination based on the needs of students by teachers of students with visual impairments (Lewis & Allman, 2017; Spungin et al., 2016). Even though the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) emphasizes addressing students’ needs for service delivery (United States Department of Education, 2004), some teachers of students with visual impairments continue taking other factors such as caseload size into account for service intensity determination (Pogrund et al., 2019). Similarly, The Michigan Vision Services Severity Rating Scale (Michigan Department of Education, 2017) does not focus on the individual needs of the students to recommend service time. For example, it considers teachers’ availability such as travel time while determining service intensity. It also uses students’ visual condition as a criterion, which may not always accurately reflect the needs of the students for service delivery time.

Exploring States’ Variations in Prevalence and Eligibility Criteria for Students With Visual Impairments Including Blindness

The prevalence of students with visual impairments (VI) varies across the United States, yet no analysis exists on how individual state factors may correlate with the number of students receiving services. This study presents the results of an analysis of variations in eligibility criteria for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) category “visual impairments including blindness” and a series of statistical models exploring correlations between prevalence rates for students with VI and state-level variables during the 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 school years. Multiple regression analyses indicated that requiring specific assessments as part of the eligibility process may strongly correlate to states’ number of students with visual impairments reported in Child Count and explain the degree of difference between Child Count and total population reports. Child Count prevalence rates were higher in states that housed a preparation program for teachers of students with visual impairments. Implications for policy makers, administrators, and practitioners were discussed.

Parent Perceptions of the Advocacy Expectation in Special Education

Although the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) mandates parent participation in their children’s education programs, the implementation of IDEA results in parent effort beyond participation, specifically, an expectation of advocacy. To date, research on the advocacy expectation is mixed, with some parents perceiving advocacy as an obligation to ensure appropriate services for their children, whereas others argue it is unreasonable and has cultural dissonance, disadvantaging some parents. We examined parent perspectives of the advocacy expectation in special education through 19 focus groups with 127 parents of children with disabilities across four states. Findings included a nuanced understanding of the advocacy expectation, with participants reporting the importance of advocacy and some describing that advocacy was part of their social role. However, under adversarial circumstances with school personnel, participants described feeling overwhelmed because the advocacy expectation felt more difficult than it needed to be. We discuss implications for policy and practice.

Education and Transition for Students With Disabilities in American Juvenile Correctional Facilities

National rates of juvenile incarceration show that about 33% of the population in correctional confinement has disabilities such as behavioral disorders or specific learning disabilities. All students identified under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) as having a disability are entitled to special education and transition services when they are incarcerated if they need specialized services. Despite the requirements for education and transition, research shows that rates of recidivism increase from about 55% for the general population of incarcerated youth to approximately 85% for youth with disabilities. This article addresses three related questions: (a) What educational and transitional services does IDEIA require schools to offer students in juvenile correctional facilities in the United States? (b) How are parents involved with the education and rehabilitation of their children with disabilities in correctional confinement? (c) What are the challenges associated with parental involvement and transition to and from incarceration for students with disabilities?

State Systemic Improvement Planning: Impact on System and Student Outcomes

In the wake of reports of continued gaps between youth with and without disabilities in regard to graduation rates and postschool outcomes, the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE), Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) began examining their process for monitoring state implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). OSEP’s revised accountability system, known as Results-Driven Accountability, better aligns accountability systems to support states in improving results for infants, toddlers, and youth with disabilities and their families. Currently required from states, is a comprehensive multiyear State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) focused on improving results for students with disabilities. The purpose of this article is to describe the phases of the SSIP and provide an example of how this new accountability system is working in the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). As with all other states, territories, and freely associated states, RMI is required to develop and implement an SSIP.

Preparing Families of Young Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder for Formal School Settings

Transitioning young children with autism spectrum disorder from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) Part C to Part B 619 is a multifaceted process. This process may leave families stressed, worried, and frustrated due to the lack of awareness of expectations and their rights. Educators can better prepare parents and caregivers for the changes in service delivery and transitions to formal school settings using family-centered practices and in turn reduce the feelings of uncertainty associated with this transition while promoting family competence, confidence, and advocacy skills. Building better relationships with families and including the families in the planning, developing, and implementation processes can help prepare families for this significant transition.

Constructing Effective Responses: Considerations for Integrating a Service Animal Into a Public School

A respected principal finds himself caught in the middle of a complex legal conundrum when a student requests to bring a service animal to his public school where another student may be dangerously allergic to the animal. This case explores how accommodations per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) intersect in a public school setting where classroom space and personnel resources are limited. Educational leaders will be able to construct effective responses by understanding how the three laws apply to students with disabilities who request that their service animals accompany them to public school and when their requests may come into conflict with the needs of others.

Perceptions and practices of U.S. pre-service special education teachers on teaching social studies instruction in inclusive classrooms

ABSTRACT In the most recent reauthorization of the seminal U.S. special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), reaffirmed that students with disabilities should be taught in their least restrictive environment. This environment has progressively been seen as the general education classroom. The push for inclusion has resulted in a heightened sense of collaboration and co-teaching practices between general and special educators. Within general education settings, inclusion asks that special educators assume a more active, unified and participatory role in the design and delivery of content-based instruction. This study surveyed 179 preservice special education teachers through questionnaires regarding their practices and perceptions of teaching social studies in inclusive settings. The results indicate that preservice students lacked a cogent definition of social studies as well as exposure to effective instructional practices. Both deficits contributed to a general lack of confidence in their ability to teach social studies in general education settings. It was therefore recommended that preservice special educators take a social studies methods course which supports field-based exposure to co-planning and co-teaching collaborative opportunities.

The Role of Self-Efficacy and Autonomy Support in School Psychologists’ Use of ABA

The most recent version of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) emphasizes research-based intervention in the school setting. Administrators expect school psychologists to lead initiatives introducing interventions and techniques derived from scientific approaches, such as applied behavior analysis (ABA). However, in the field of school psychology, the use and possible barriers of ABA are largely unknown. The study’s purpose was to gather data to evaluate whether self-efficacy and autonomy support mediate the relationship between school psychologists’ training and reported use of ABA. Participants included 405 practicing school psychologists who provided information about their training and completed measures of self-efficacy, autonomy support, and reported practice. Structural equation modeling revealed that training predicted reported ABA practice, and these direct relationships were mediated by self-efficacy. Autonomy support was related to both training and reported practice but did not mediate the association between them. Although ABA training for school psychologists is increasing, results provide preliminary support for the mediating relationship between a school psychologists’ perception of self-efficacy for ABA and the use of ABA in practice. In addition to traditional training and coursework, findings suggest that practicing school psychologists need opportunities in the field to enhance their self-efficacy related to the practice of ABA.

Practices of Assistive Technology Implementation and Facilitation: Experiences of Teachers of Students with Visual Impairments in Singapore

Assistive technology is defined by the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004 as any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a (IDEIA, 2004). This broad definition includes devices and software that are beneficial in supporting the instruction of students with disabilities in special education (Duhaney & Duhaney, 2000). General benefits of assistive technology are evident in the literature (Alper & Raharinirina, 2006). Benefits of assistive technology are also reported for students with visual impairments (Abner & Lahm, 2002; Kelly, 2009). IDEIA also describes the need for assistive technology services, which it describes as any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an assistive technology (IDEIA, 2004). Services include evaluation; purchasing; selecting, designing, or adapting; coordination of device use or services; device training; or expanding the availability of assistive technology. The number of assistive technology devices that have the potential to empower individuals with disabilities has increased in recent years. Kintsch and DePaula (2002) found that even when the devices are purchased, success with these technologies is questionable because individuals with disabilities and their caregivers are unable to integrate the devices into their daily routines. Evaluating the technological needs of individuals with disabilities and identifying the appropriate assistive technology items that will increase their functional capabilities in daily life require guidelines and models (Lee & Templeton, 2008). Broadly, consideration of devices includes a process of evaluation, acquisition, personalization, service coordination, and training (Bausch, Quinn, Chung, Ault, & Behrmann, 2009). Three major points are evident. First, the definition of assistive technology is diverse and multifaceted. Second, there is a process by which to navigate through assistive technology consideration. Third, providing assistive technology services is best facilitated by collaboration among professionals (Watts, O'Brian, & Wojcik, 2004). Increasingly, parents are also reported to influence assistive technology adoption and usage (Bausch & Ault, 2008; Hourcade, Parette, & Huer, 1997). Yet given the general definitions of assistive technology and assistive technology services, broad interpretation is reported to pose challenges for assessment, selection, training, and service provision (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006; Watts et al., 2004). Assessing and navigating among assistive technology considerations are therefore indispensable. Ultimately, deciding on the most beneficial device is not straightforward but involves a process of assessment. Beigel (2000) posits that assessment involves three strands: learners, environments, and technology. ASSESSMENT The purpose of assessment is primarily to provide data for team decision making (Stiggins, 2001), with the goal of achieving student attainment of specific skills and knowledge (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA], 1999; Presley & D'Andrea, 2009). Formative assessment helps teams determine learning styles of students over a period of time (Hobson, 1997). These assessments also need to reflect a post-recommendation assessment of a device to determine its effectiveness. Ultimately, assessment models must demonstrate a direct link to learning objectives and student outcomes (Silverman, Stratman, & Smith, 2000). Assessment models need to have technical adequacy sufficient to achieve valid and reliable decisions. Technical adequacy may also be achieved by using multiple assessment tools to meet specific needs. The avoidance of bias across respondents and contexts is necessary (Watts et al. …

Critical Issues in Specific Learning Disability Identification

As a result of the upcoming Federal reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), practitioners and researchers have begun vigorously debating what constitutes evidence-based assessment for the identification of specific learning disability (SLD). This debate has resulted in strong support for a method that appraises an individual’s profile of cognitive test scores for the purposes of determining cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses, commonly referred to as patterns of strengths and weaknesses (PSW). Following the Fuchs and Deshler model, questions regarding the psychometric and conceptual integrity of the PSW model are addressed. Despite the strong claims made by many PSW proponents, the findings by this review demonstrate the need for additional information to determine whether PSW is a viable alternative to existing eligibility models and worthy for large scale adoption for SLD identification. Implications for public policy and future SLD research are also discussed.

Applying Generalizability Theory for Making Quantitative RTI Progress-Monitoring Decisions

Language in the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) allows the use of response-to-intervention (RTI) methodology in the identification of specific learning disabilities. However, there is no consensus on decision rules using curriculum-based measurement of oral reading fluency (CBM-R) for defining responsiveness. The purpose of this article is to describe how to apply generalizability (G) theory for making quantitative high-stakes RTI decisions. A sample of 68 first-grade students (36 females and 32 males) was randomly administered the first-grade Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills oral reading fluency probes and correct words per minute (CWPM) were calculated for conducting both a generalizability (G) study and a decision (D) study using G theory. The results showed that the average raw scores (CWPM) across 20 probes encompassed a wide range from a low of 69 CWPM to a high of 88 CWPM. In addition, 90.2% of the variance was due to student reading skill, 7.0% was due to unaccounted sources of error, and only 2.8% was due to passage or probe variability. Also, the increasing number of probes administered (from 1 to 9) considerably reduced the values of standard error of measurement and increased the reliability coefficients. An example is provided to demonstrate how to apply G theory in using CBM-R data to guide psychometrically valid RTI decisions at the individual student level.

General Education Pre-Service Teachers’ Levels of Concern on Response to Intervention (RTI) Implementation

Revisions to Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) proposed alternative models, such as Response to Intervention (RTI), as a preventive measure that supports students at risk. As teachers’ roles evolve in response to RTI, teacher preparation programs must adjust their focus and curriculum accordingly. A mixed-methods design was used to explore general education pre-service teachers’ concerns regarding the implementation of RTI based on the Concerns-Based Adoption Model. Results suggest pre-service teachers focused their concerns on feeling unprepared and not understanding how to effectively implement RTI. These implications may guide teacher preparation programs as they assess the readiness of their pre-service teachers to effectively implement RTI.

Continuing Challenges for Learning Disabled Students

It may come as a surprise to the readership that the 2004 legislative changes resulting in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) have made it increasingly difficult for learning disabled students to access services. A decade later, many of us who work with students from pre-K through college and beyond are finding that accommodations like extended time, computer use, and other assistive technologies previously available under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also have been curtailed. Students who previously enjoyed “extended time” on standardized tests now find their requests for this accommodation are being denied with increasing frequency. What has happened? Why are students who previously qualified under Individual with Disabilities Act unable to access necessary service? The answer to this question is disturbing, but relatively straight forward: many school systems have failed to adopt this new standard and rely instead on the pre-2004 criteria. In brief, these criteria require both the diagnosis of a disability (or disabling condition) and a demonstration that the condition has a significant educational impact. While continued reliance on these criteria may be appropriate for decision regarding special educational services, it is problematic when applied to eligibility for accommodations. In 2009, the definition of the term “disability” was broadened in a way that lowered the threshold for receiving accommodations (Public Law, 110-32s). Previously, children with conditions like myopia, diabetes, asthma, and/ or Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) qualified only if a significant education impact could be documented in spite of medical treatment. The new statue now requires school districts to consider these disabling conditions independent of the individual’s response to intervention. Thus, a child treated with Adder all for ADHD meets the standard for a disability because a positive response to medication can no longer be used to disqualify him. More than ever, careful psychological evaluation will be necessary to demonstrate the presence of “significant” and “substantial” disabilities. Specifically, this will require that psychologists are familiar with the language of these statues in order to effectively assist families in their efforts to navigate what often is a daunting qualification process in order to receive the services so many children desperately need. It also means that physicians will be asked to play a greater role in documenting these conditions and identifying their impact on learning. In a time of economic uncertainty, these changes are a welcome opportunity to help children and young adults develop the skills they will need to be happy, healthy, and productive adults. Editorial

Relationships Among Family Participation, Team Support, and Intensity of Early Intervention Services

ABSTRACTAims: In America, children with disabilities and their families may receive early intervention (EI) services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). The IDEA mandates that decisions on service delivery are based on the needs of the child and family. It is unclear how decisions on intensity of services are made in EI. The purpose of this study was to determine whether parent participation and team support are determinants of the recommendation for intensity of service at the initial Individualized Family Service Planning (IFSP) meeting. Methods: The participants were 63 parents of children 2–33 months of age and 74 professionals. The first author observed all IFSP meetings and completed the Parent Participation Measure. Following the meeting, parents completed a demographic form, the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, and the Family Needs Survey. The recommended intensity of service was recorded. Results and Conclusions: Parent participation and team support were not significant determinants of intensity of EI service after controlling for child development and family needs (R2 = 0.145, p = .14). The recommended intensity of service was 240 min per month for 57% of the families suggesting that factors other than parent participation and team support influenced the decision on intensity of service.

English

The following Expert Panel White Paper should be considered a working document for reference purposes. This White Paper project was undertaken to address the Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA) concerns regarding the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004 statutory and regulatory requirements for the identification of Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD), and the subsequent U. S. Department of Education Final Regulations and Commentary regarding implementation of IDEIA (34 CFR Parts 300 and 301; Federal Register, 2006).The purpose of the White Paper is to provide additional information for and guidance to the federal government, professional organizations, practitioners, and the public. The LDA is hopeful that this document will facilitate legal, regulatory, policy, and training decisions, and ultimately, service delivery to children with SLD.Subsequent to public release, the LDA sought to examine the arguments presented in IDEIA and the Final Regulations. The LDA Public Policy/Advocacy Committee solicited a number of professionals to examine the evidence that supported or refuted the information presented in the law and commentary. This LDA effort resulted in an LDA White Paper Survey of experts in the field, which in turn led to the production of this White Paper.This White Paper presents the expert professional opinions and empirical evidence regarding the identification of children with SLD and best practices in SLD service delivery. The preliminary findings of the LDA Expert Panel Survey (see Appendix A) and this White Paper represent the opinions and empirical evidence presented by 56 university professors and researchers, special education administrators, and special education lawyers with expertise in and public recognition for their work in SLD identification and intervention.All Expert Panel participants have published extensively in SLD, cognitive/neuropsychological assessment of high incidence disorders including SLD, and/or SLD educational intervention, in peer-reviewed journals, peer reviewed scholarly books, and/or argued legal cases in court proceedings. Individual curricula vitae are available upon request. However, it is important to recognize this was not a random sample of potential experts, but rather a survey of those individuals who have been recognized by their peers as SLD scholars with legitimate professional investments in the law and practice concerning SLD identification and intervention.This White Paper provides a summary of these Expert Panel White Paper Survey opinions, with relevant, but not exhaustive citations (provided as endnotes) that provide support for these conclusions. The five major conclusions drawn from these opinions and empirical evidence include the following:Maintain the SLD definition and strengthen statutory requirements in SLD identification procedures;Neither ability-achievement discrepancy analyses nor failure to respond to intervention (RTI) alone is sufficient for SLD identification;To meet SLD statutory and regulatory requirements, a third method approach that identifies a pattern of psychological processing strengths and deficits, and achievement deficits consistent with this pattern of processing deficits, makes the most empirical and clinical sense;An empirically validated RTI model could be used to prevent learning problems in children, but comprehensive evaluations should occur whenever necessary for SLD identification purposes, and children with SLD need individualized interventions based on specific learning needs, not merely more intense interventions designed for children in general education; andAssessment of cognitive and neuropsychological processes should be used not only for identification, but for intervention purposes as well, and these assessment-intervention relationships need further empirical investigation.