Developing a Compliant and Instructionally relevant IEP Jill Blom ADMS 625 Leadership for Individualized Learning Developing a Compliant and Instructionally relevant IEP

Goals Provide a quick resource to assist staff in the development of compliant and instructionally relevant IEPs. Provide a brief overview of the components of an IEP Provide a short list of what to include & what not to include

Individualized Education Program Essential component of a successful education for children with a disability Federal regulations are quite specific about how the IEP should be developed, what it should contain, & who should be involved It is a legally binding document

Key Terms in the SPED World Least Restrictive Environment:  a continuum of placements that is based on the student’s needs.  These placements are made by the IEP team and consideration is given to any potential harmful effects of the placement on the child or the quality of services needed.  Inclusion:  the student will be in the general classroom with supports, unless it is shown that the child cannot benefit from education in the this setting. Due Process: an administrative remedy for parents if they feel proper protocol was not following in the crafting or follow through of an IEP Eligibility:  The process in which the IEP team determines if a child is entitled to receive special education services. Appropriate Education:  a process definition:  if the district follows a certain process in the development and implementation of the IEP, then the student should be receiving an acceptable result.  Co-teaching:  utilizes the expertise of the general education teacher and special education teacher in the same classroom, working together to teach all students.   

Federal Regulations: A brief Overview The Rehabilitation Act of 1973:  Authorizes payment of federal funds to institutions based on compliance with regulations governing the education of students with disabilities. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974:  This act does more than define who may and may not see student records.  The Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975:  this federal law, which preceded the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), required states to develop and implement policies to assure a free appropriate public education to all children with disabilities.

Federal Regulations: A brief Overview (continued) Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990:  This law is essential the same as the Act of 1975; however, the terminology changed to reflect the philosophy that the individual should be recognized first and the condition second.  IDEA defines children with disabilities as those who are intellectually disabled, are hard of hearing, deaf, speech or language impaired, visually disabled, seriously emotionally disturbed, orthopedically impaired or other health impaired, autistic, deaf-blind, or have specific learning disabilities or traumatic brain injury.  This law was later revised and amended in 2004. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990:  Allows statutory venues for remediation and complaints.  This way, individuals with disabilities and their families have a way to file complaints against school systems.  No Child Left Behind Act 2001:  includes requirements about parental involvement, highly-qualified teachers, scientifically based reading instruction, tutoring and supplemental educational services, research-based teaching methods, and school and school district report cards.

Purpose of IEP Instructional Communication Management Accountability IEP’s have multiple purposes, each is extremely important: Instructional Communication Management Accountability Monitoring Evaluation

Components of an IEP Present Level of Performance (the PLOP) Academic and Functional Goals Short Term Objectives Specific Special Education Program Provided Additional Services Transition Statement (when applicable)

Tips for Assessing an IEP Does the IEP include all necessary components as required by law? Does the IEP demonstrate a clear tie between the goals and the objectives? Does the IEP link the designed instruction to the evaluation data? Were the parents provided with a copy of their rights and a copy of the procedural safeguards? Was a person knowledgeable about the specific disability part of the team? Was a general education teacher a part of the team?

Things better left unsaid at an IEP meeting There is no room in that class. That is not something we do at this school. Frankly, we just don’t have the money for that. There can be no more meetings because we have met our quota. Your child needs meds.

Final tips Consult, ask, double check as much as needed Rely on the specialty and experience of the team Meet all deadlines in a timely manner Make data driven decisions Every IEP is unique, don’t go through the motions Be sure when you sign This is all about providing a equitable and appropriate education for a child

Sources Parts of this helpful PowerPoint were created using the following: Bateman, D., & Bateman, C. F. (2006). A principal's guide to special education (2nd ed.). Arlington, Va.: Council for Exceptional Children. A variety of resources from Dr. Rachel Foglesong, current professor at Virginia Commonwealth University, and Principal of A.M. Davis Elementary School, Chesterfield County Public Schools.