1. The Foldable IEP A Student-Directed Individualized Education Program Model A Review of the Curriculum and the Research David J. Royer, M.S.

2. Do I have to go to my IEP meeting? My IEP meetings are BORING! But I never went to my IEP before! I hate going to my IEP meeting…

3. Teachers Administrators Counselors Therapists Psychologists Support staff Advocates

4. Why? Why do students not enjoy IEP meetings? –intimidating (Arndt et al., 2006) –meaningless: feel at a loss, don’t understand the process or the language, feel voice is unheard (Martin, Van Dycke, Greene et al., 2006) –unfamiliar, purposeless, unprepared (Fiedler & Danneker, 2007) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

5. Since IDEA… Attendance has increased –1997 IDEA reauthorization called for more parent and student IEP involvement Participation is passive –students talk 3% of the time –family members talk 15% –special education teachers talk 51% (Arndt, Konrad, & Test, 2006; Branding, Bates, & Miner, 2009; Martin, Van Dycke, Christensen, et al., 2006; Martin, Van Dycke, Greene, et al., 2006) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

6. My Research Questions How can students become more active participants throughout the IEP process, both in the planning and at the meeting? If students are more active at their IEP meeting, will they –understand it better? –enjoy it more? –be more likely to attend willingly? –increase their self-determination and self- advocacy? –will faculty and staff enjoy the meetings more? CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

7. Existing Research Active IEP participation = self-determination = self-advocacy which leads to –improved learning experiences –increased social interactions –improved quality of life –greater independence –success in college and adult life –obtaining employment and earning higher wages (Abernathy & Taylor, 2009; Branding et al., 2009; Dalke, 1993; Danneker & Bottge, 2009; Eisenman, Chamberlin, & McGahee-Kovac, 2005; Jones, 2006; Malian & Nevin, 2002; Martin et al., 2003; Mason, Field, & Sawilowsky, 2004; Sebag, 2010; Test, Fowler, Wood, et al., 2005; Ward, 2005; Wehmeyer & Schalock, 2001; Wehmeyer & Schwartz, 1997; Wood & Test, 2001) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

8. Existing Research How to get students active? Teach self-advocacy –knowledge of self = key component Students with disabilities often –don’t understand their disability –don’t know why they receive services –don’t know why they have an IEP (Abernathy & Taylor, 2009; Fiedler & Danneker, 2007; Tungland, 2002) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

9. Lack of Self-Knowledge Special education teachers –unskilled at or unwilling to have authentic discussions with students about their disabilities –should use technically correct language to teach students about their disability (Abernathy & Taylor, 2009) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

10. Lack of Self-Knowledge Students with disabilities –need instruction to help them recognize, accept, and understand their disability –when they do, they more often go to teachers to advocate for accommodations feel more responsible for their education later succeed in postsecondary education better employees (Jones, 2006; Dalke, 1993; Test, Fowler, Brewer, et al., 2005; Tungland, 2002) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

11. Disability Awareness Many resources available Effectiveness depends on individual student needs and disabilities Mix and match material Whole class v. individual instruction …completed. Now what? CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

12. Active IEP Participation Lead the meeting! –preparing to lead the IEP meeting involves the student in every aspect –meets federal regulations –easy to teach whole class, small groups, one-on-one CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

13. Existing Research Students-led IEP meetings –personalized atmosphere –simple, jargon-free language –more optimistic –more positive comments directed to the student –increased attainment rate and motivation toward goals (Barrie & McDonald, 2002; Bremer et al., 2003; Fiedler & Danneker, 2007) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

14. Existing Research Students who lead their IEP meeting –feel vested in the process –actively participate in discussions and decisions –actively choose IEP and transition goals –remember, pursue, and attain goals more often –increase self-advocacy, self-determination, intrinsic motivation –have more positive educational outcomes (Algozzine et al., 2001; Arndt et al., 2006; Field, 1996; Kohler, 1996; Sands & Doll, 1996) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

15. Existing Curricula Student-Led IEPs: A Guide for Student Involvement (McGahee, Mason, Wallace, & Jones, 2001) –41 pages long –intimidating to teachers (Eisenman et al., 2005) –too much background information on educational law how to plan a lesson, create a study guide, etc. –only suggests how to begin –post-it notes and index cards (Mason et al., 2002) ~$77.00 CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

16. Existing Curricula Self-Directed IEP (Martin, Marshall, Maxson, & Jerman, 1997) –multimedia lesson package ~$120 teacher manual, scripted lessons, 27-page student workbook, video cassette –eleven steps to lead an IEP –two lessons per week over six weeks –criticism time to teach too extensive, student workbook too long, too expensive researched focused on transition plan portion only –increased student talk time from 5.83% to 12.82% (Martin, Van Dycke, Christensen et al., 2006) CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

17. NOT GOOD ENOUGH

18. Can you make learning to lead my IEP short? I don’t want to fill out 27 pages.

19. Can you make it interesting? Make it colorful!

20. Please don’t overwhelm me, I’m only in middle school, but I want to try.

21. What about culturally and linguistically diverse students, and those from low socio-economic families. Will it work for everyone? It needs to be simple for us too. Make it affordable.

22. My Solution The Foldable IEP –Tangible, folding graphic organizers for each IEP section required by IDEA –Comprehensible ‘chunks’ –Scripted, if needed by the student –Easily presentable –Spectrum color order (red, orange, yellow…)

23. Study Design Quasi-experimental –two ninth-grade RSP teachers equivalent caseloads: reading levels, age, ethnicity, ELL status, GPA, socioeconomic status, disability category, initial self-determination level –pretest-posttest IEP knowledge assessment (student) IEP meeting satisfaction survey (student, family, staff) –10-second momentary time sampling for participant talk times –meeting length CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

24. Study Design “Student-led” checklist 1.introduce self 2.introduce all team members 3.state the purpose of the meeting 4.express personal interests and goals 5.express skills 6.review past goals and performance 7.close the proceedings CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

25. Study Design October 2010 Taught whole class, 4 sections (5 to 10 students) Six lessons Three weeks Mock-IEPs after each lesson –students present every foldable they’ve completed so far each time One extra practice right before IEP meeting CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

26. Comparison Group Same self-advocacy curriculum “Know Your IEP” curriculum Same –number of classes –students per class –timeline –pretests, posttests, satisfaction surveys, time sampling Teacher led IEP meeting CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

27. Success! The Foldable IEP Introductions Transition Plan

28. Study Results IEP Meeting Length –c–comparison group (control) : average = 46min –i–intervention group: average = 40min Longer? Shorter? Same?

29. IEP Meeting Length

30. Participant Talk Time CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S. Existing literature –students talk 3% of the time –family members talk 15% –special education teachers talk 51% (Arndt, Konrad, & Test, 2006; Branding, Bates, & Miner, 2009; Martin, Van Dycke, Christensen, et al., 2006; Martin, Van Dycke, Greene, et al., 2006) The Foldable IEP?

31. Participant Talk Time CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

32. David J. Royer, Jordan HS Study Results Post IEP Knowledge (student) –comparison mean: 0.555  0.995 / 5 –intervention mean: 0.381  3.211 / 5

33. Study Results “Student-led” IEPs –Control: 0%- Intervention: 92% –Checklist: the student introduced him/herself introduced all team members stated the purpose of the meeting expressed personal interests and goals expressed skills and interests reviewed past goals and performance closed the proceedings CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

34. Study Results Meeting Satisfaction Surveys

35. Next Step Keep using it Additional studies –new schools –additional grade levels –middle school –longitudinal data Complete package CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

36. Scripted Lesson Plans Essential Elements of Effective Instruction (EEEI) Format Vertical lesson planning format

37. Templates

38. Foldable IEP Curriculum Teacher lesson plans Graphic organizer templates Videos of how to assemble them Name tent template Vocabulary flashcards Videos of students leading their IEP meeting using the Foldable IEP curriculum CEC 2012  David J. Royer, M.S.

39. Q&A