Special Education PPT. - William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
THREE Special EducationWilliam Allan Kritsonis, PhD
jargon of special educationp.l. 94-I42: passed in 1975 guaranteeing every child with a disability free and appropriate education now know as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)504: prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities in programs that receive federal fundsFAPE: Free, appropriate public educationIEP: Individualized education programARD: Admission, review, and dismissal.Placement: This refers to the instructional arrangement in which the child is educated.LRE: Least restrictive environment
jargon of special educationRelated Services: Special transportation and other non-instructional services that are necessary for the child to obtain benefit from the educational program.Eligibility: Meeting certain criteria for federally funded special education programs.FIE: Full Individual Evaluation.IEE: Independent Educational Evaluation.ESY: Extended School YearOSEP: Office of Special Education Programs.
Federal legislation Child Find• School districts take an active role in identifying and serving students with a need.• Publicize the availability of special education services.• Train teachers to identify the typical signs of disability• Reach out to private-school administrators and home schoolers.
Federal Legislation Evaluation• To avoid untutored labeling a Full Individual Evaluation (FIE)• ARD committee meets in order to eliminate unnecessary testing.• Parents have the right to disagree with decisions if so they are entitled to obtain an Independent Educational Evaluation but can force the district to accept data.
Federal Legislation EligibilityTwo Requirements 1. Student must have a disability that qualifies under the law 2. The student must as a result of the disability need special education services
Federal Legislation ARD CommitteeARD Committee is composed of: 1. The parent (s) 2. A regular education teacher 3. A special education teacher 4. Someone who can interpret the instructional implications 5. A representative of the school district 6. Others in the judgment of the parents or the school, have special knowledge or expertise 7. When appropriate, the student
Federal Legislation Individualized Education Program• A statement of the child’s present levels of education• Measurable annual goals, including short- term objectives• Related services, supplemental aids and services, program modifications and supporters for school personnel that provides services to the child• Explanation for class exclusion• Modifications needed• Dates services are provided• Statement of how the parents will be informed of child’s progress
Federal Legislation General Curriculum• Refers to the things the regular education students are expected to learn• Special education students should be taught as much as possible, the same subject matter that the regular education students are taught.
Federal Legislation NCLB and Statewide Assessments• Require states to hold all students to the same academic standards, and to demonstrate “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) through statewide test in certain subjects.
Federal Legislation Least Restrictive Environment• The law mandates that LRE, but it also mandates a full continuum of alternative placements, some of them highly restrictive.• Other terms Mainstreaming, and Inclusion
Federal Legislation Procedural SafeguardsFour Aspects1. Notice2. Consent3. The right to an IEE4. The right to a Due Process Meeting
Federal Legislation Attorneys’ Fees• Parents who “prevail” in a special education dispute with a school district are entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees.• Congress put some limits on recovery of attorney fees in IDEA 1997 and 2004.
Federal Legislation FAPEBoard of Education v. Rowley established two things1. School districts are not required to maximize the potential of a child but rather provide some educational benefit to the child.2. How courts in the future would examine disputes under IDEA
Federal Legislation Related Services• If a student needs the services to attend school, and the service can be provided by someone other than an M.D., then the school district must provide or pay for the service.
Federal LegislationExtended School Year Services
Federal Legislation Unilateral Placements PARENTS vs. SCHOOL - Reimbursement This involves a disagreement between school and parent as to the appropriate placementI. . Cost Reimbursements What the school believes What the parent believesII. Burden of Proof - Parent Prove IEP and/or Placement recommended by school is inappropriate Parents prove their arranged IEP and Placement are appropriateIII. Factors faced by - Parent Law presumes program recommended by school is appropriate Law require school to propose a program that confer (reasonable benefit) School proposed program will be less restrictive than the private placementIV. Teague I.S.D. v. Todd L. (1993) Denied Reimbursement Denied School program appropriate Restrictive vs. Non-RestrictiveV. Florence County School District Four v. Carter(1994) Facility Argument U S Supreme Court ReimbursementVI. IDEA 1997 Procedural Requirements School – Line of Defense (fix problem) Parent - Procedural Requirement Notice Private Schooling – Assemble, evaluate, devise, and determine FAPE
Federal Legislation Private-School Children IDEA 1997Under child find the public school is required to evaluate studentsin private school for special education.They are also required to spend a proportionate share of federalspecial education funds I. Public to Private Child Find Proportionate Share II. IDEA 1997 FAPE Services No Due process Decisions by ISD Loss of rights III. Texas Exception Dual Enrollment
Discipline of Students with Disabilities The ARD committee must review all relevant information and then answer two questions: 1. Was the conduct of the student caused by, or did it have a direct and substantial relationship to the child’s disability? 2. Was the conduct of the student a direct result of the school’s failure to implement the IEP? I. Congress and Special Education Guarantee an appropriate education Encourage safe classrooms free drugs II. S-1 v. Turlington U.S. Court of Appeals / Fifth Circuit Student Behavior Students Classification Disability or Not III. Supreme Court – Honig v. Doe Dangerous Behavior Suspension Lengths Injunction “Stay Put” provision of IDEA Then Current Placement IV. Congress revision of Special Education discipline laws in IDEA 1997 Congress enacted into federal law a requirement Expellable Act Congress nullifies major court decision V. Common Wealth of Virginia v. Riley Congress Intervention revised IDEA Nondisabled vs. Disabled
DISCIPLINE OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES V. Continued… Exception to “stay put” Violation to Code of Conduct Removal longer Than 10 days Congress adopted statutory language Cumulative rule VI. Concept of a “Manifestation Determination” IDEA 1997 ARD Committee Texas Legislature – TEC §37.0021 Restraint and Time Out Time Out
Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 I. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973 Federal Money Americans with Disabilities Act Section 504 three pronged definition Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 II. 504 Special Treatment Physical or Mental Impairment ADD LEP Coverage of 504 III. Mitigating Measures - Performance Medication Non Medication IV. 504 Eligible Performance Potential Genuine physical or mental impairment Major life Activity V. IDEA vs. 504 Standards for eligibility Requirements