Spe 792 face to face class 1


Published on

June 18th Class Presentation

Published in: Health & Medicine, Education
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Spe 792 face to face class 1

  1. 1. SPE 792 (633) Advanced Seminar in Severe and Low Incidence Disabilities Definitions, Descriptions, Characteristics, & Potential Historical Models of Service Delivery Philosophy and Best Practices for Educating Individuals with Severe Disabilities
  2. 2. Who we are & who we strive to be… If you think they are the same thing, I think you are wrong.
  3. 3. They are not always the same… Who I want to be… Who I am…
  4. 4. Our Agenda <ul><li>Defining a population </li></ul><ul><li>Characteristics </li></ul><ul><li>Civil rights, legislation, litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Program standards </li></ul><ul><li>Components of effective programs </li></ul><ul><li>Models of service delivery </li></ul><ul><li>Valued Practices </li></ul><ul><li>Share our Scavenger Hunt finds </li></ul>
  5. 5. Our schedule…. <ul><ul><li>Begin: 9:00 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AM Break:10:00 – 10:15 a.m. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lunch: Noon – 1:00 p.m. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PM Break: 2:00 - 2:15 p.m. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>End: 3:00 </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Definitions What they are… Where they come from… What they mean…
  7. 7. IDEA Categories of Disability <ul><li>Autism </li></ul><ul><li>Deaf-blindness </li></ul><ul><li>Deafness </li></ul><ul><li>Emotional Disturbance </li></ul><ul><li>Hearing Impairment </li></ul><ul><li>Mental Retardation </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple Disabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Orthopedic Impairment </li></ul><ul><li>Other Health Impairment </li></ul><ul><li>Specific Learning Disability </li></ul><ul><li>Speech or Language Impairment </li></ul><ul><li>Traumatic Brain Injury </li></ul><ul><li>Visual Impairment including Blindness </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.ccsd.cc/users/myweb5/definitions_of_13_disability_cat.htm </li></ul>
  8. 8. Which “count” as a severe disability?
  9. 9. Definitions - TASH <ul><li>Individuals of all ages who require extensive ongoing support in more than one major life activity in order to participate in integrated community settings and to enjoy a quality of life that is available to individuals with fewer or no disabilities. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Definitions - AAIDD <ul><li>Mental Retardation is a disability characterized by significant limitations both in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills. </li></ul>
  11. 11. IDEA Definition of MR <ul><li>Significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior. And manifested during the developmental period that adversely affects a child's educational performance. </li></ul>
  12. 12. MS Definition of “SCD” <ul><li>T o classify a student as having a “significant cognitive disability,” all of the following must be true:  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The student demonstrates significant cognitive deficits and poor adaptive skill levels (as determined by that student’s comprehensive assessment) that prevent participation in the standard academic curriculum or achievement of the academic content standards, even with accommodations and modifications. </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. MS Definition of “SCD” (continued) <ul><ul><li>2. The student requires extensive direct instruction in both academic and functional skills in multiple settings to accomplish the application and transfer of those skills. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3. The student’s inability to complete the standard academic curriculum is not the result of excessive or extended absences or primarily the result of visual, auditory, or physical disabilities; emotional-behavioral disabilities; specific learning disabilities; or social, cultural, or economic differences. </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Definitions - AAIDD <ul><li>Mental Retardation is a disability characterized by significant limitations both in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills. </li></ul>
  15. 15. Five Assumptions Essential to the Application of the AAIDD Definition <ul><li>Limitations in present functioning must be considered within the context of community environments typical of the individual's age peers and culture. </li></ul><ul><li>Valid assessment considers cultural and linguistic diversity as well as differences in communication, sensory, motor, and behavioral factors. </li></ul><ul><li>Within an individual, limitations often coexist with strengths. </li></ul><ul><li>An important purpose of describing limitations is to develop a profile of needed supports. </li></ul><ul><li>With appropriate personalized supports over a sustained period, the life functioning of the person with mental retardation generally will improve. </li></ul><ul><li>©2002 American Association on Mental Retardation. </li></ul>
  16. 16. “ Old” Ways to Classify in AAMR (now AAIDD) using just “intelligence” <ul><li>Mild (IQ range 50-55 to about 70) </li></ul><ul><li>Moderate (IQ range 35-40 to 50-55) </li></ul><ul><li>Severe (IQ range 20-25 to 35-40) </li></ul><ul><li>Profound (IQ level below 20-25) </li></ul>
  17. 17. Significantly Sub average IQ <ul><ul><li>A diagnosis of MR requires an IQ score at least 2 standard deviations below the mean (70 or less) </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. What’s wrong with IQ? <ul><li>IQ is hypothetical construct </li></ul><ul><li>Tests are biased </li></ul><ul><li>Tests are not valid for students with lower cognitive abilities. </li></ul>
  19. 19. Adaptive Behavior Skills <ul><li>Conceptual Skills </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Receptive and expressive language </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reading and writing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Money concepts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-directions </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. Adaptive Behavior Skills <ul><li>Social Skills </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interpersonal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Responsibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-esteem </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gullibility (likelihood of being tricked or manipulated) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Naiveté </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Follows rules </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Obeys laws </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Avoids victimization </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Adaptive Behavior Skills <ul><li>Practical Skills </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Personal activities of daily living such as eating, dressing, mobility and toileting. Instrumental activities of daily living such as preparing meals, taking medication, using the telephone, managing money, using transportation and doing housekeeping activities. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Occupational skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maintaining a safe environment </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Intensity of Supports - AAIDD <ul><li>Intermittent </li></ul><ul><ul><li>As needed, short-term supports </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Limited </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistent support for limited time </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Extensive </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistent support in some settings </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Pervasive </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consistent, high intensity support in most settings </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. Notice the discrepancy… <ul><li>“ Mild, moderate, severe, profound” are reflective of old AAIDD definition </li></ul><ul><li>“ Intermittent, limited, extensive, pervasive” are reflective of the new AAIDD definition </li></ul><ul><li>“ EMR and TMR” are old categories of MR from IDEA; “SCD” is now present in No Child Left Behind. </li></ul>
  24. 24. Severe Disabilities <ul><li>Significant disabilities in intellectual, physical, and/or social functioning </li></ul><ul><li>“ Severe disabilities” is not one of the 13 eligibility categories in IDEA </li></ul>
  25. 25. Multiple Disabilities <ul><li>Multiple disabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple disabilities means concomitant impairments, that causes such severe educational problems that they cannot be accommodated in special education programs solely for one impairment </li></ul>13-2
  26. 26. Stop and Think… <ul><li>What’s good and bad about using different terms to classify ‘levels’ of disability? </li></ul><ul><li>Do you think we’ll see a shift to the new “categories” in the AAIDD definition? Why or why not? </li></ul><ul><li>What words, if any, should we use to describe this population? </li></ul>
  27. 27. Causes <ul><li>In almost every case of severe disabilities, a brain disorder is involved </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Chromosomal disorders </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Genetic or metabolic disorders that can cause serious problems in physical or intellectual development </li></ul></ul>13-4
  28. 28. Causes <ul><li>Severe disabilities may develop later in life from head trauma </li></ul><ul><li>In about one-sixth of all cases, the cause cannot be clearly determined </li></ul>13-4
  29. 29. Prevalence <ul><li>Prevalence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Estimates range from 0.1% to 1% of the population </li></ul></ul>13-3
  30. 30. Prevalence <ul><li>Approximately 1% of the total school enrollment received special education services in the MR category </li></ul><ul><li>Mild MR cases make up about 85% of all persons with MR </li></ul><ul><li>(2000-2001 data) </li></ul>
  31. 31. Learning and Social Characteristics
  32. 32. We know that individuals with severe disabilities… <ul><li>Learn at a significantly slower rate than do peers without disabilities. </li></ul><ul><li>Experience difficulty in maintaining knowledge and skills acquired. </li></ul><ul><li>Have difficulty combining skills that have been taught separately. </li></ul><ul><li>Have difficulty generalizing skills learned in one setting to a different setting. </li></ul>Alper, S. (1996). An ecological approach to identifying curriculum content for inclusive settings. In Ryndak & Alper, Curriculum Content for Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities in Inclusive Settings . Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  33. 33. Characteristics <ul><ul><li>Slow acquisition rates for learning new skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Poor generalization and maintenance of newly learned skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited communication skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Impaired physical and motor development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Deficits in self-help skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stereotypic and challenging behavior </li></ul></ul>13-3
  34. 34. Other Learning Characteristics <ul><li>Attention to Stimuli Dimensions and Cues </li></ul><ul><li>Observational and Incidental Learning </li></ul><ul><li>Memory </li></ul><ul><li>Skill Synthesis </li></ul><ul><li>Generalization </li></ul><ul><li>Self-Regulation </li></ul>
  35. 35. Personal-Social Characteristics <ul><li>Friendships and personal relations </li></ul><ul><li>Love and sexuality </li></ul><ul><li>Challenging behaviors </li></ul>
  36. 36. The U.S. Constitution, Legislation, and Litigation
  37. 37. What defines rights for individuals with disabilities? <ul><li>Begin with Constitution </li></ul><ul><li>Most issues concerning rights begin with litigation based on Constitutional rights </li></ul><ul><li>Litigation informs laws that are enacted </li></ul><ul><li>Laws then form basis for future litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Laws revised over time based on litigation </li></ul>
  38. 38. Key Rights Issues Over Time <ul><li>Right to “treatment” (services and supports) </li></ul><ul><li>Right to least restrictive environment </li></ul><ul><li>Right to education </li></ul><ul><li>Right to early intervention </li></ul><ul><li>Right to access general education </li></ul>
  39. 39. Who Decides? <ul><li>Many cases involving disability rights are heard in federal court </li></ul><ul><li>This is because most laws affecting individuals with disabilities are federal </li></ul>
  40. 40. Civil Rights for ALL <ul><li>Rights guaranteed by the US Constitution to each citizen, regardless of disability: </li></ul><ul><li>Access to the courts and legal representation </li></ul><ul><li>Free association </li></ul><ul><li>Right to contract, own, and dispose of property </li></ul><ul><li>Equal educational opportunity </li></ul><ul><li>Equal employment opportunity </li></ul>
  41. 41. Civil Rights for ALL <ul><li>Rights guaranteed by the US Constitution to each citizen, regardless of disability: </li></ul><ul><li>Equal protection and due process </li></ul><ul><li>Fair and equal treatment by public agencies </li></ul><ul><li>Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment </li></ul><ul><li>Freedom of religion </li></ul><ul><li>Freedom of speech and expression </li></ul>
  42. 42. Civil Rights for ALL <ul><li>Rights guaranteed by the US Constitution to each citizen, regardless of disability: </li></ul><ul><li>Right to marry, procreate, and raise children </li></ul><ul><li>Right to privacy </li></ul><ul><li>Right to services in the least restrictive environment </li></ul><ul><li>Right to vote </li></ul>
  43. 43. Key Litigation Leading to Landmark Legislation <ul><li>Plessy v. Ferguson </li></ul><ul><li>1896 </li></ul><ul><li>A landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation even in public accommodations (particularly railroads), under the doctrine of &quot;separate but equal&quot;. </li></ul>
  44. 44. Key Litigation Leading to Landmark Legislation <ul><li>Brown vs. the Topeka Board of Education </li></ul><ul><li>1954 </li></ul><ul><li>Supreme court overturned the Plessy vs. Ferguson case that declared that states could provide “separate but equal” educational opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>This case declared that separate schools </li></ul><ul><li>are inherently not equal, </li></ul><ul><li>and thus began desegregation. </li></ul>
  45. 45. Plessy v. Ferguson & Brown vs. BOE: Key Similarities <ul><li>Both groups can show that they had been denied equal educational opportunities; </li></ul><ul><li>Both allege an unconstitutional denial and base their arguments on equal protection principals; </li></ul><ul><li>Both challenge separateness in education; </li></ul><ul><li>Both are strengthened by the reasoning that relies on concepts of stigma and detrimental educational consequences; </li></ul><ul><li>Both successfully advance positive public policy; </li></ul><ul><li>Both have similar interests in obtaining an education; and </li></ul><ul><li>Both lay claim to the functions of the schools to meaningfully educate all students </li></ul>
  46. 46. Key Litigation Leading to Landmark Legislation <ul><li>Wyatt vs. Stickney </li></ul><ul><li>1974 </li></ul><ul><li>The Constitution guarantees persons civilly committed to state mental institutions a right to treatment. </li></ul><ul><li>Greatly influenced the “least restrictive doctrine” that people should be served under conditions that maximize opportunities to live and learn in normal settings in the community </li></ul>
  47. 47. Key Litigation Leading to Landmark Legislation <ul><li>New York ARC v. Rockefeller </li></ul><ul><li>(Willowbrook Case) </li></ul><ul><li>1972 </li></ul><ul><li>Found conditions in Willowbrook State School (NY) to be deplorable </li></ul><ul><li>This case resulted in a major initiative to establish community services after attempts to improve institution failed </li></ul><ul><li>This was one of the first national initiatives for community-based housing for individuals with severe disabilities </li></ul>
  48. 48. Key Litigation Leading to Landmark Legislation <ul><li>Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania </li></ul><ul><li>All people with mental retardation are capable of benefiting from an education </li></ul><ul><li>PA provides a free public education to all children, this must include those with mental retardation </li></ul><ul><li>PA may not deny access to a free public education to any child with mental retardation </li></ul><ul><li>PA has an obligation to place all children with mental retardation in a free, public education and training appropriate to the child’s capacity, within the context of general educational policy…placement in a regular class is preferable to placement in a special class… </li></ul>
  49. 49. Civil Rights <ul><li>The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and the War on Poverty in the 1960s began to confront inequities. </li></ul><ul><li>Court battles and Federal Legislation brought special services to the poor, immigrant, and disabled </li></ul>
  50. 50. Evolving Rights 1958 1965 1973 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Bars discrimination Against the disabled and requires appropriate education The Elementary And Secondary Education Act Authorized federal aid to improve the education of disabled children The Education of Mentally Retarded Children Act Authorized funding to train teachers. 1975 1990 Education for All Handicapped Children Act Guarantees a FAPE. IDEA Americans with Disabilities Act ADA
  51. 51. How have litigation and legislation affected the education of individuals with disabilities? <ul><li>The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act </li></ul><ul><li>Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act </li></ul><ul><li>The Americans with Disabilities Act </li></ul><ul><li>The Developmental Disabilities Act </li></ul>
  52. 52. The Developmental Disabilities Act <ul><li>Establishes programs that support people with developmental disabilities and helps them achieve their maximum potential through increased: </li></ul><ul><li>Self-determination </li></ul><ul><li>Independence </li></ul><ul><li>Productivity </li></ul><ul><li>Integration in all facets of life </li></ul>
  53. 53. The Developmental Disabilities Act: Title I <ul><li>Updates policy and continues the authorizations for 3 traditional programs: </li></ul><ul><li>State Councils on Developmental Disabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Protection and Advocacy Systems </li></ul><ul><li>University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities in Education, Research, and Service </li></ul>
  54. 54. The Developmental Disabilities Act: Title II <ul><li>Provides funding to states to assist them in establishing and improving services to families that wish to keep their family members with developmental disabilities at home </li></ul>
  55. 55. The Developmental Disabilities Act: Title III <ul><li>A uthorizes the development of a training program and a scholarship program for direct support workers who assist individuals with developmental disabilities and their families. </li></ul>
  56. 56. The Americans with Disabilities Act <ul><li>Guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in: </li></ul><ul><li>Public accommodations </li></ul><ul><li>Employment </li></ul><ul><li>Transportation </li></ul><ul><li>State and local government services </li></ul><ul><li>Telecommunications. </li></ul>
  57. 57. The ADA: Employment <ul><li>Employment discrimination is prohibited against &quot;qualified individuals with disabilities.&quot; This includes applicants for employment and employees. </li></ul><ul><li>An individual is considered to have a &quot;disability&quot; if s/he has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment. </li></ul><ul><li>Persons discriminated against because they have a known association or relationship with an individual with a disability also are protected. </li></ul>
  58. 58. The ADA: Other Components <ul><li>Public Accommodations </li></ul><ul><li>State and Local Government </li></ul><ul><li>Transportation </li></ul><ul><li>Telecommunications </li></ul>
  59. 59. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act <ul><li>to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a &quot;free appropriate public education&quot; that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for employment and independent living; </li></ul><ul><li>to ensure that the rights of children and youth with disabilities and their parents are protected; </li></ul><ul><li>to assist States, localities, educational service agencies, and Federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and </li></ul><ul><li>to assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. (Section 300.1) </li></ul>
  60. 60. IDEA: Who is eligible? <ul><li>Has been evaluated according to IDEA’s evaluation requirements; </li></ul><ul><li>Who has been determined, through this evaluation, to have one or more eligible disabilities; AND </li></ul><ul><li>Who, because of the disability, needs special education and related services. </li></ul>
  61. 61. IDEA: Free, appropriate, public education (FAPE) <ul><li>Under the law, a free appropriate public education (FAPE) means special education and related services that: </li></ul><ul><li>are provided to children and youth with disabilities at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charge; </li></ul><ul><li>meet the standards of the State Education Agency (SEA), including the requirements of the IDEA; </li></ul><ul><li>include preschool, elementary school, or secondary school education in the State involved; and </li></ul><ul><li>are provided in keeping with an individualized education program (IEP) that meets the requirements of law, as specified in Sections 300.340-300.350. (Section 300.13) </li></ul>
  62. 62. IDEA: Protecting the Rights of Children & Families <ul><li>IDEA gives parents the right to… </li></ul><ul><li>inspect and review their child's educational records </li></ul><ul><li>obtain an independent educational evaluation </li></ul><ul><li>be given written prior notice </li></ul><ul><li>request mediation & an impartial due process hearing on these matters </li></ul><ul><li>be given a full explanation of all of the procedural safeguards available under IDEA and the State complaint procedures </li></ul><ul><li>to appeal the initial hearing decision </li></ul><ul><li>bring a civil action in an appropriate State or Federal court to appeal a final hearing decision </li></ul><ul><li>request reasonable attorney's fees from a court for actions or proceedings brought under the IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>give or refuse consent before their child is evaluated or reevaluated and before their child is provided with special education and related services for the first time </li></ul>
  63. 63. IDEA: Protecting the Rights of Children & Families <ul><li>IDEA gives students the right to… </li></ul><ul><li>to remain in his or her present educational placement, unless the parent and the public agency agree otherwise, while administrative or judicial proceedings are pending (this is called the “stay put provision”. </li></ul><ul><li>discipline procedures for students with disabilities </li></ul>
  64. 64. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act <ul><li>&quot;No otherwise qualified individual with disabilities in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of his/her disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance or activity conducted by any executive agency or by the United States Postal Service.&quot; 29 U.S.C. 794. </li></ul>
  65. 65. Section 504: Implications for Schools <ul><li>Educational setting </li></ul><ul><li>Free, appropriate education </li></ul><ul><li>Transportation </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluations </li></ul><ul><li>Placement procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Nonacademic services </li></ul><ul><li>Residential placement </li></ul><ul><li>Nonpublic school placements made by parents </li></ul>
  66. 66. How has litigation affected educational services provided under IDEA? <ul><li>Key Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Due Process </li></ul><ul><li>Eligibility </li></ul><ul><li>Placement </li></ul><ul><li>Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) </li></ul><ul><li>Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)/Inclusion </li></ul>
  67. 67. Key Litigation: Due Process <ul><li>William Smith v. Special School District, No. 1 </li></ul><ul><li>July 15, 1999 </li></ul><ul><li>This case upheld the due process proceedings and time deadlines in IDEA. The court found in favor of the school system as the student and his parents failed to show violations of the procedural rights under IDEA. </li></ul>
  68. 68. Key Litigation: Eligibility <ul><li>Timothy W. v. Rochester NH School Dist. </li></ul><ul><li>1989 </li></ul><ul><li>FAPE must be provided regardless of the severity of the child's disability and may not be refused based upon the determination that the child would not benefit from the educational services. </li></ul>
  69. 69. Key Litigation: Placement <ul><li>Burlington School Comm. v. Mass. Dept. of Ed. </li></ul><ul><li>April 29, 1985 </li></ul><ul><li>Parents may receive reimbursement for tuition for an unilateral private school placement if the public school district did not provide an appropriate IEP or FAPE and the private school is an appropriate placement. </li></ul>
  70. 70. Key Litigation: Placement <ul><li>Honig v. Doe </li></ul><ul><li>January 20, 1988 </li></ul><ul><li>The &quot;stay put&quot; provision was supported in this case involving two students with labels of emotional disturbance and who exhibited violent behaviors. </li></ul>
  71. 71. Key Litigation: FAPE <ul><li>Hendrick Hudson Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Rowley </li></ul><ul><li>June 28, 1982 </li></ul><ul><li>Held that FAPE is provided when the IEP provides individualized instruction and support services to give educational benefit to the child with a disability. </li></ul>
  72. 72. Key Litigation: FAPE <ul><li>O'Toole v. Olathe District Schools </li></ul><ul><li>May 19, 1998 </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA does not require the school, in providing FAPE, to offer the optimal educational program for a child. </li></ul>
  73. 73. Key Litigation: FAPE <ul><li>Ridgewood Board of Education v. M.E. March 30, 1999 </li></ul><ul><li>This case defined a standard for FAPE indicating the IEP and placement must offer &quot;significant learning&quot; and provide &quot;meaningful benefit&quot;. </li></ul>
  74. 74. Key Litigation: FAPE <ul><li>Irving Independent School Dist. v. Tatro July 5, 1984 </li></ul><ul><li>This case affirmed some services perceived as medical to be school health related services and created a three prong &quot;bright-line&quot; test: </li></ul><ul><li>the child with a disability must qualify under IDEA for special education, </li></ul><ul><li>the service is necessary to aid the child with a disability to benefit from special education, and </li></ul><ul><li>the service must be able to be provided by a qualified person other than a physician. </li></ul>
  75. 75. Key Litigation: LRE/Inclusion <ul><li>Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education </li></ul><ul><li>June 12, 1989 </li></ul><ul><li>Created a two-part test of the appropriateness of the placement: </li></ul><ul><li>Can the child be educated in a regular classroom with supplementary aids and services including: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>a comparison of benefits to the segregated setting and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>possible negative effects on the other students? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Has the school mainstreamed the child to the maximum extent possible? </li></ul>
  76. 76. Key Litigation: LRE/Inclusion <ul><li>Oberti v. Board of Education </li></ul><ul><li>May 28, 1993 </li></ul><ul><li>The court held that the school district bears the burden of proving compliance with the least restrictive environment requirement of IDEA. </li></ul>
  77. 77. Key Litigation: LRE/Inclusion <ul><li>Sacramento City School Dist. v. Rachel H. </li></ul><ul><li>January 24, 1994 </li></ul><ul><li>Established a four part test in this determination of LRE: </li></ul><ul><li>The educational benefits of placement in a regular class with appropriate aids and services; </li></ul><ul><li>the non-academic benefits of interaction with non-disabled children; </li></ul><ul><li>the effect of the disabled child on the teacher and other students in the classroom; and </li></ul><ul><li>the cost of mainstreaming the child with a disability. </li></ul>
  78. 78. What is in Place <ul><li>Early intervention services based on identified needs per state policy </li></ul><ul><li>Entitlement to free appropriate education in least restrictive environment </li></ul><ul><li>Requirement that special education support access to general education curriculum </li></ul><ul><li>Requirement that special education include transition plan for students 14 and older </li></ul>
  79. 79. What is in Place <ul><li>Medicaid funding to support long-term health related services for individuals with disabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Rehabilitation funding to support short term (up to 18 months usually) vocational training for individuals with disabilities </li></ul>
  80. 80. What is not in Place <ul><li>There is no federal entitlement law regarding adult services </li></ul><ul><li>Adult (long term) services are sponsored by state agencies using state funds and Medicaid funds </li></ul><ul><li>The number and type of services in place varies widely from state to state </li></ul>
  81. 81. Our Challenge <ul><li>How do we address federal, state, and local accountability requirements AND meet the unique needs of learners with severe disabilities? </li></ul><ul><li>How do we ensure high quality access to general curricula and environments AND meet the unique needs of this population? </li></ul>
  82. 82. How does it fit together? <ul><li>Groups of 2-3 </li></ul><ul><li>Review the valued practice statements </li></ul><ul><li>Map the relationship of constitutional rights, legislation & litigation to that statement </li></ul>
  83. 84. Families should be empowered to be equal partners in the education process. Underlying Civil Rights Access to Courts and Legal Representation (due process) Free Association (Can’t be discriminated against because involved with child’s needs) <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Burlington School vs. Mass Dept of Ed </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>DDA </li></ul><ul><li>NCLB </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration and frequent communication </li></ul><ul><li>Including parents in instructional planning (persisting even when get limited response) </li></ul>
  84. 85. Evaluation of learning must focus on quality of life issues. Underlying Civil Rights Right to Services in the LRE <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education </li></ul><ul><li>Sacramento City School District vs. Rachel H. </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Appropriate related services </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration with experts </li></ul>
  85. 86. Underlying Civil Rights Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) Litigation Legislation <ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Well-developed IEP </li></ul><ul><li>Compliance of IDEA, Section 504 </li></ul><ul><li>Hendrick Hudson v. Rowley </li></ul><ul><li>O’Toole v. Olathe District </li></ul><ul><li>Ridgewood Board Ed. V. M.E. </li></ul><ul><li>Irving Ind. School v. Tatro </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Section 504 </li></ul>Appropriate education includes both education and support.
  86. 87. Individuals with significant disabilities have the same rights as typical citizens. Underlying Civil Rights Right to services in LRE, equal educational opportunities, equal employment opportunities, freedom from cruel/unusual punishment, equal protection/due process <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>William Smith v. Special School District </li></ul><ul><li>Timothy v. Rochester NH School District </li></ul><ul><li>Burlington School Comm. V. Mass. Dept. of Ed. </li></ul><ul><li>Oberti v. Bd. Of Education </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>ADA </li></ul><ul><li>Section 504 </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Compliance with LRE and FAPE requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Access to equal opportunities in the workplace </li></ul>
  87. 88. All students have the ability to learn. Underlying Civil Rights Right to Equal Educational Opportunities <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Honig v. Doe (1988) </li></ul><ul><li>PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971) </li></ul><ul><li>O’Toole v. Olathe District Schools (1998) </li></ul><ul><li>Timothy W. v. Rochester NH Schools (1989) </li></ul><ul><li>Hendrick Hudson B.O.E. v. Rowley (1982) </li></ul><ul><li>Ridgewood B.O.E. v. M.E. (1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Community Based Training (White and Weiner 2004) </li></ul>
  88. 89. Teachers should be lifelong learners; professional development is an ongoing process. Underlying Civil Rights Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Oberti v. Board of Education (1993) </li></ul><ul><li>William Smith v. SSd #1 (1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>Americans with Disabilities Act 1990 </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>CEU’s </li></ul><ul><li>Highly qualified </li></ul><ul><li>Licensure </li></ul>
  89. 90. Teachers’ attitudes & actions affect opportunities for individuals with significant disabilities. Underlying Civil Rights Equal Educational Opportunity <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Brown vs. The Topeka Board of Education </li></ul><ul><li>Wyatt vs. Stickney </li></ul><ul><li>PARC vs. Commonwealth of PA </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>The Developmental Disabilities Act </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Inclusion </li></ul>
  90. 91. Personnel must take a systems approach & assume multiple roles to be effective educators. Underlying Civil Rights Equal Educational Opportunity <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Hendrick vs. District of Rowley </li></ul><ul><li>Timothy W. vs. Rochester School </li></ul><ul><li>Ridgewood Board Ed vs. ME </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>The Developmental Disabilities Act </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Differentiated Instruction </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher will collaborate with PT, OT, SLP… </li></ul>
  91. 92. Students should learn meaningful skills that have longitudinal value. Underlying Civil Rights Right to Equal Educational Opportunities Right to Services in the LRE <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Ridgewood Board of Education v. M.E. </li></ul><ul><li>Oberti v. Board of Education </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Developmental Disabilities Act </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Transition Planning, Programming, and Provision of Appropriate Services </li></ul>
  92. 93. Special education reform efforts must be aligned with general education. Underlying Civil Rights Equal Educational Opportunity <ul><li>Litigation </li></ul><ul><li>Plessy v. Ferguson </li></ul><ul><li>Brown v. Topeka </li></ul><ul><li>PARC v. Pa </li></ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul><ul><li>IDEA </li></ul><ul><li>Best Practices Supported by Research </li></ul><ul><li>Include students with severe disabilities in elective classes such as PE using adaptive PE strategies; Art classes using assistive technology </li></ul><ul><li>modify general curriculum components using alignment techniques such as written expression to pictorial representations using multi-media </li></ul>
  93. 94. Program Standards
  94. 95. CEC Standards (The Red Book) <ul><li>Initial Special Education Teachers of Individuals </li></ul><ul><li>with Exceptional Learning Needs </li></ul><ul><li>in Individualized Independence Curricula (IIC) </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 1: Foundations </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 2: Development and Characteristics of Learners </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 3: Individual Learning Differences </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 4: Instructional Strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 5: Learning Environments and Social Interactions </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 6: Language </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 7: Instructional Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 8: Assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 9: Professional and Ethical Practice </li></ul><ul><li>Standard 10: Collaboration </li></ul>
  95. 96. TASH Resolution on Inclusive Quality Education <ul><li>General Components </li></ul><ul><li>A single set of standards that embraces all students; a broad umbrella of standards that encompasses supplemental educational needs, including functional or independent living skills; </li></ul><ul><li>Teaching which uses heterogeneous groupings and a variety of age-appropriate instructional strategies based upon students' learning needs and which emphasizes learning strategies designed to enable students to meet the standards or components of the single set of standards; </li></ul><ul><li>High expectations for all students; </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers who treat each student as a uniquely important individual and who are knowledgeable about research based practices that assist students with diverse learning needs to learn; </li></ul><ul><li>Program philosophy which emphasizes the value of diversity, multiculturalism, social justice, and belonging for everyone; </li></ul><ul><li>Access for all students to campuses and classrooms, including co-curricular and extra-curricular activities, that are free from prejudice and other physical and psychological barriers; </li></ul><ul><li>Comprehensive, sensible and culturally competent curricula which are effective for the full range of learners; and, </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunities for all secondary school students to participate in community and/or job skill development programs which do not impact negatively on participation and full membership in their high school community. </li></ul>
  96. 97. TASH Resolution on Inclusive Quality Education <ul><li>Assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Thorough analysis of the learning needs of all students; </li></ul><ul><li>Broad use of unbiased and culturally sensitive assessment procedures that enhance students' strengths and assist in the identification of their needs; </li></ul><ul><li>Accountability for achievement which is based, in part, on each student's personal potential and educational experience; </li></ul><ul><li>Full participation in all state or districtwide assessments to enable students with disabilities to participate in the accountability system; and, </li></ul><ul><li>Measuring whether schools and local educational agencies are making progress toward enabling all students to meet challenging standards set for all students and holding schools and districts accountable, in part, through public reporting requirements. </li></ul>
  97. 98. TASH Resolution on Inclusive Quality Education <ul><li>Communication </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasis on the importance of family involvement and home-school communication structures that are culturally responsive and which empower families; </li></ul><ul><li>Conscious creation of a strong sense of community and fostering mutual respect and support among education staff, parents, and students; </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration among teachers, other personnel, family members, students and peers to plan and deliver educational services ; and, </li></ul><ul><li>Well-delineated processes for problem-solving as defined by the family, student and classmates. </li></ul>
  98. 99. TASH Resolution on Inclusive Quality Education <ul><li>Staff Development </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher training programs at the in-service and preservice levels that are inclusive and collaborative of general and special education teachers so that all teachers will be prepared to teach all students effectively; </li></ul><ul><li>Appropriate staff development programs for administrators, teachers, family members, paraprofessionals, and related services staff which will develop the necessary understandings, skills and behaviors; and, </li></ul><ul><li>Professional development designed to ensure that teachers of students with disabilities are knowledgeable about research based practices for effectively teaching students to high standards. </li></ul>
  99. 100. TASH Resolution on Inclusive Quality Education <ul><li>Supports </li></ul><ul><li>Provision of all necessary and appropriate supports and services to provide all students with opportunities for success; </li></ul><ul><li>Access to curriculum accommodations and modifications which allow students to access core curriculum and assessment and accountability systems; </li></ul><ul><li>A broad range of personal support services (e.g. speech, reading, occupational therapy) which are closely coordinated with the general education classroom's goals and activities and which are provided in general education settings; </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional and assistive technologies that foster self-determination, participation, and choice; </li></ul><ul><li>Creative ways to allocate special and general education resources , with funding obstacles removed; and, </li></ul><ul><li>The use of positive behavioral supports that are based on functional assessment of problem behavior. </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.tash.org/IRR/resolutions/res02inclusiveed.htm </li></ul>
  100. 101. Five Components of Effective Programs <ul><li>Community Presence </li></ul><ul><li>Community Participation </li></ul><ul><li>Dignity </li></ul><ul><li>Promoting Choice </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting Contributions </li></ul>
  101. 102. Community Presence <ul><li>Creating many different opportunities for people with disabilities to be present in local school and community life. </li></ul><ul><li>Future visions and individualized plans are reviewed to assess the extent to which they provide a rich variety of opportunity to be present in typical school and community settings. </li></ul>
  102. 103. Community Participation <ul><li>Creating opportunities to expand and deepen relationships and friendships with other members of the community. </li></ul><ul><li>The extent to which plans, services, and supports not only promote community presence, but also community participation must be evaluated. </li></ul>
  103. 104. Dignity <ul><li>The reputation that people have in their communities. Valued people are people who are viewed as having valued social roles and are treated with dignity. </li></ul><ul><li>Programs must be evaluated by the extent to which they enable community members to see the valued contributions of the person. </li></ul>
  104. 105. Promoting Choice <ul><li>Opportunities for the person to have more choice and ultimately more control over his or her life must be sought and created. </li></ul><ul><li>The extent to which the person can obtain information and make informed choices about important life areas must be evaluated. </li></ul>
  105. 106. Supporting Contributions <ul><li>Supports must be provided to persons in becoming community members. Competent community members are viewed in light of their gifts & capacities instead of their deficits & disability labels. </li></ul><ul><li>The extent to which programs & activities uncover and build upon the focus person’s gifts & capacities must be evaluated. </li></ul>
  106. 107. Models of Service Delivery
  107. 108. Models of Programming <ul><li>Medical Model </li></ul><ul><li>Developmental Model </li></ul><ul><li>Ecological Model </li></ul>
  108. 109. Medical Model <ul><li>Focuses on what is ‘wrong’ with the individual. </li></ul><ul><li>Tries for a cure. </li></ul><ul><li>Traditionally has examined disability apart from the context of the person’s life. </li></ul>
  109. 110. Developmental Model <ul><li>Provides a global picture of abilities in relation to the abilities of typical individuals. </li></ul><ul><li>Focuses on the FORM of the behavior </li></ul><ul><li>or skill instead of the FUNCTION. </li></ul>
  110. 111. Developmental Model (cont.) <ul><li>Often focuses on skills in isolation rather than within the context of real activities. </li></ul><ul><li>Does not allow individuals to move on to higher level skills until more basic ones are achieved. </li></ul>
  111. 112. Ecological Model: Advantages <ul><li>Based on current and future environments therefore is individualized and relevant to the person’s life skill needs. </li></ul><ul><li>Utilizes a ‘top-down’ approach. Individuals don’t get bogged down in ‘readiness’ activities. </li></ul><ul><li>Minimizes the need for generalization since actual activities and environments are used. </li></ul>
  112. 113. Ecological Model: Disadvantages <ul><li>Time consuming when planning </li></ul><ul><li>Yields many skills without prioritizing </li></ul><ul><li>For individuals with profound disabilities, the list of skills may be analyzed so carefully that any real purpose or function is lost </li></ul>
  113. 114. Basis of the Ecological Approach? <ul><li>The ecological model of curriculum development is designed to determine those skills needed for a particular individual to participate in meaningful activities within his or her current and future environments. In order to identify individual skills needed to engage in these activities, service providers conduct an “ecological inventory”. </li></ul>
  114. 115. What are Domains? <ul><li>Domestic </li></ul><ul><ul><li>skills performed in and around the home </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Leisure-Recreation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>skills used to participate in or to watch such activities </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Community </li></ul><ul><ul><li>skills needed to move about in the community and to use stores and services </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Vocational </li></ul><ul><ul><li>skills used to acquire and maintain work </li></ul></ul>
  115. 116. Does it all fit?
  116. 117. Current Valued Practices <ul><li>Inclusion and integration </li></ul><ul><li>Social integration </li></ul><ul><li>Functional, age-appropriate skills </li></ul><ul><li>Nonschool, community-based instruction </li></ul><ul><li>Self-determination, self-advocacy </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Early intervention </li></ul><ul><li>Positive behavior support </li></ul><ul><li>Use of assistive technology and augmentative communication </li></ul>
  117. 118. So….what am I doing?! <ul><li>There are lots of issues underlying service design and delivery. </li></ul><ul><li>The teachers’ underlying philosophical approach is one of the most critical indicators of what happens to, for, and with individuals with severe disabilities. </li></ul>
  118. 119. How it fits for YOU… SPE 792/633 Basic Principles, Intro to Assessment, Curriculum & Instruction SPE 643 Identifying and Designing Curricula and Programs SPE 645 Effective Instruction and Assessment SPE 688, 641, 600, 652, 691 Health/Medical, Transition, Research, Behavior, Communication Emphasis Area Practicum