Pub Date : 2023-10-08DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2263598
Amanda N. Johnston, Meghan M. Burke
ABSTRACTHigh quality family-professional partnerships promote the personal, social, and academic growth of students with disabilities. However, due to systemic barriers, such partnerships can be difficult, especially for families from low-resourced communities. Using the Sunshine Model, the purpose of this systematic literature review was to characterize the literature about family-professional partnerships among families of children with disabilities from low-resourced communities. Altogether, 10 studies were identified. In most studies, participants reported poor family-professional partnerships. Facilitators of strong partnerships included professionals who: attempted to form relationships with families, provided families with training opportunities and resources, cared for students, and encouraged families to ask questions. Barriers to partnerships included: unfamiliarity with the school or special education system, limited familial support, the differing views between families and professionals, unique barriers due to being low-resourced, and cultural and linguistic barriers. Implications for research and practice are discussed. Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
{"title":"Family-Professional Partnerships in Low-Resourced Communities: A Systematic Literature Review","authors":"Amanda N. Johnston, Meghan M. Burke","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2263598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2263598","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTHigh quality family-professional partnerships promote the personal, social, and academic growth of students with disabilities. However, due to systemic barriers, such partnerships can be difficult, especially for families from low-resourced communities. Using the Sunshine Model, the purpose of this systematic literature review was to characterize the literature about family-professional partnerships among families of children with disabilities from low-resourced communities. Altogether, 10 studies were identified. In most studies, participants reported poor family-professional partnerships. Facilitators of strong partnerships included professionals who: attempted to form relationships with families, provided families with training opportunities and resources, cared for students, and encouraged families to ask questions. Barriers to partnerships included: unfamiliarity with the school or special education system, limited familial support, the differing views between families and professionals, unique barriers due to being low-resourced, and cultural and linguistic barriers. Implications for research and practice are discussed. Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135197780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-20DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2203929
S. E. Goldman, Nanho Vander Hart
ABSTRACT Solutions for the special education teacher shortage typically focus on the retention of inservice teachers. A different approach starts earlier, focusing on preservice teachers who are developing their skillsets and determining their field of interest. Using Social Cognitive Career Theory as a framework, we examined preservice teachers’ special education career-related outcomes. In this pilot study, we evaluated the effect of a school-university partnership compared to a typical introduction to special education course. Using a quasi-experimental design, 77 participants completed pre- and post-measures on their special education: (a) perceived knowledge and comfort, (b) teaching efficacy, (c) career outcome expectations, (d) interest, and (e) career intentions. Results of paired t-tests showed that participants in both groups improved significantly in their perceived special education knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy, with larger effect sizes for the partnership group. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) showed higher posttest scores in special education self-efficacy, interest, and intentions for those in the partnership group. Themes from participants’ open-ended responses mirrored quantitative findings. Implications from this pilot study for research, practice, and policy are discussed.
{"title":"The Impact of a School-University Partnership Model on Preservice Teacher Outcomes: Developing Future Special Educators","authors":"S. E. Goldman, Nanho Vander Hart","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2203929","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2203929","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Solutions for the special education teacher shortage typically focus on the retention of inservice teachers. A different approach starts earlier, focusing on preservice teachers who are developing their skillsets and determining their field of interest. Using Social Cognitive Career Theory as a framework, we examined preservice teachers’ special education career-related outcomes. In this pilot study, we evaluated the effect of a school-university partnership compared to a typical introduction to special education course. Using a quasi-experimental design, 77 participants completed pre- and post-measures on their special education: (a) perceived knowledge and comfort, (b) teaching efficacy, (c) career outcome expectations, (d) interest, and (e) career intentions. Results of paired t-tests showed that participants in both groups improved significantly in their perceived special education knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy, with larger effect sizes for the partnership group. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) showed higher posttest scores in special education self-efficacy, interest, and intentions for those in the partnership group. Themes from participants’ open-ended responses mirrored quantitative findings. Implications from this pilot study for research, practice, and policy are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42589237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-29DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2196425
Chelsea W. Morgan, Gregory A. Cheatham, S. Lim, Jennifer M. Amilivia, Jose R. Martinez
ABSTRACT Efforts to address the identified needs of labeled groups of children (e.g. identified with disabilities, considered at-risk) may magnify difference and further stigmatize children labeled as different. In this article, we introduce a relational framework to the field of inclusive early childhood education that reframes perceptions of difference by disrupting and redistributing power through relationships. The social-relations approach informs this framework to foster relational aspects of young children’s experiences of inclusive education in preschool. This framework, with adequate systems-level supports, may serve as a model leading to best practice by enabling the access and participation of all children in learning opportunities within genuinely inclusive, equitable contexts. This reframing of difference through relationships, rather than locating difference within the child, holds implications for research, practitioners, and the profession.
{"title":"Enacting the Social-Relations Approach: A Relational Framework for Inclusive Early Childhood Education","authors":"Chelsea W. Morgan, Gregory A. Cheatham, S. Lim, Jennifer M. Amilivia, Jose R. Martinez","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2196425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2196425","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Efforts to address the identified needs of labeled groups of children (e.g. identified with disabilities, considered at-risk) may magnify difference and further stigmatize children labeled as different. In this article, we introduce a relational framework to the field of inclusive early childhood education that reframes perceptions of difference by disrupting and redistributing power through relationships. The social-relations approach informs this framework to foster relational aspects of young children’s experiences of inclusive education in preschool. This framework, with adequate systems-level supports, may serve as a model leading to best practice by enabling the access and participation of all children in learning opportunities within genuinely inclusive, equitable contexts. This reframing of difference through relationships, rather than locating difference within the child, holds implications for research, practitioners, and the profession.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42504937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2174985
J. B. Schumaker
ABSTRACT This study involved a pretest-posttest control-group design in which four multimedia writing programs were tested with secondary students across a school year. These programs were based on strategic instruction and focused on the skills of writing complete sentences, paragraph writing, and theme writing. Measures included scores on practice activities and quizzes, time spent, knowledge tests about writing skills, sentence-construction scores, complete sentences scores, planning scores, paragraph-organization scores, theme-organization scores, and satisfaction ratings. All of the students who used the multi-media writing programs met mastery on all of the practice activities, quizzes, and planning and writing samples. Significant and substantial differences were found between the posttest scores of the writing students and students who received other academic instruction, as well as between the writing students’ posttest scores and posttest scores of a normative comparison group.
{"title":"The Effects of Four Multimedia Writing Strategy Programs on Secondary Students’ Sentence, Paragraph, and Theme Writing","authors":"J. B. Schumaker","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2174985","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2174985","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study involved a pretest-posttest control-group design in which four multimedia writing programs were tested with secondary students across a school year. These programs were based on strategic instruction and focused on the skills of writing complete sentences, paragraph writing, and theme writing. Measures included scores on practice activities and quizzes, time spent, knowledge tests about writing skills, sentence-construction scores, complete sentences scores, planning scores, paragraph-organization scores, theme-organization scores, and satisfaction ratings. All of the students who used the multi-media writing programs met mastery on all of the practice activities, quizzes, and planning and writing samples. Significant and substantial differences were found between the posttest scores of the writing students and students who received other academic instruction, as well as between the writing students’ posttest scores and posttest scores of a normative comparison group.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"31 1","pages":"211 - 239"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43337111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-28DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2184819
K. Sanderson
ABSTRACT The individualized education program (IEP) process can be difficult for many parents of children with disabilities to navigate. Analyzing qualitative data from a national, web-based survey, this study examined parent experiences during IEP meetings, as well as advice parents have for other families participating in the IEP process. Participants included 803 parents of school-aged students with disabilities who had a current IEP from across the U.S. Results indicated that parent experiences during IEP meetings varied; however, over half of respondents described negative experiences. Further, parents offered advice for others participating in IEP meetings regarding preparedness, support, advocacy, the potential for negative meetings, being a team member, and strategies and tips for successful parent involvement in educational planning. Implications for practice and policy are discussed.
{"title":"“Be Prepared to Fight Like Hell”: Parent Advice for IEP Meetings","authors":"K. Sanderson","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2184819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2184819","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The individualized education program (IEP) process can be difficult for many parents of children with disabilities to navigate. Analyzing qualitative data from a national, web-based survey, this study examined parent experiences during IEP meetings, as well as advice parents have for other families participating in the IEP process. Participants included 803 parents of school-aged students with disabilities who had a current IEP from across the U.S. Results indicated that parent experiences during IEP meetings varied; however, over half of respondents described negative experiences. Further, parents offered advice for others participating in IEP meetings regarding preparedness, support, advocacy, the potential for negative meetings, being a team member, and strategies and tips for successful parent involvement in educational planning. Implications for practice and policy are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49391632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-09DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2174119
Amber B. Ray, Caroline Torres, Yucheng Cao
ABSTRACT Developing informative writing skills at the elementary level is critical for long-term academic and personal success. This study investigated impacts of a schoolwide implementation of Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) in inclusive classes to improve elementary students’ informative writing and teachers’ efficacy and perceptions of teaching SRSD for writing. Eighteen kindergarten through fifth-grade teachers participated in professional development and implemented SRSD with 276 students. Multilevel modeling was used to examine how students’ improvement in writing performance varied by their gender, classification (general education – receiving no additional services, receiving special education services, English Learners [ELs], and special education and EL), and number of lessons received. Student writing was scored for genre elements, holistic quality, total words written, and transition words. Results demonstrate that students in all grades improved on all measures. Gain scores of informative genre elements, holistic quality, and transition words remained significant even after controlling for student gender, classification, and the number of lessons received. In addition, teachers reported feeling more confident and skillful in teaching writing through SRSD.
{"title":"Improving Informative Writing in Inclusive and Linguistically-Diverse Elementary Classes through Self-Regulated Strategy Development","authors":"Amber B. Ray, Caroline Torres, Yucheng Cao","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2174119","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2174119","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Developing informative writing skills at the elementary level is critical for long-term academic and personal success. This study investigated impacts of a schoolwide implementation of Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) in inclusive classes to improve elementary students’ informative writing and teachers’ efficacy and perceptions of teaching SRSD for writing. Eighteen kindergarten through fifth-grade teachers participated in professional development and implemented SRSD with 276 students. Multilevel modeling was used to examine how students’ improvement in writing performance varied by their gender, classification (general education – receiving no additional services, receiving special education services, English Learners [ELs], and special education and EL), and number of lessons received. Student writing was scored for genre elements, holistic quality, total words written, and transition words. Results demonstrate that students in all grades improved on all measures. Gain scores of informative genre elements, holistic quality, and transition words remained significant even after controlling for student gender, classification, and the number of lessons received. In addition, teachers reported feeling more confident and skillful in teaching writing through SRSD.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44456939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-05DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2023.2171418
O. Coleman, J. Mcdonnell, Jessica A. Bowman, Carrie Eichelberger, Joanna Ryan, L. Conradi
ABSTRACT Teachers’ perceptions play a critical role in defining and giving meaning to new initiatives and policies in schools. However, very little is known about the perceptions of self-contained special educators responsible for students with significant cognitive disabilities (SCD) pertaining to the inclusion of students with SCD in general education classes and how those perceptions impact educational programming. In this qualitative study, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 special educators responsible for students with SCD who taught in self-contained classes within traditional public schools. The interview was designed to explore special educators’ perceptions pertaining to including students with SCD in general education classes and possible personal and environmental factors that may influence their perceptions. The findings suggest that self-contained special educators responsible for students with SCD are tentatively supportive of including their students in general education classes. However, several factors (e.g., lack of support, student abilities and skills, general educator attitudes) and reservations appeared to impact special educators’ decision-making pertaining to including their students with SCD in general education classes.
{"title":"Self-Contained Special Educators’ Perceptions toward Including Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities in General Education Classes","authors":"O. Coleman, J. Mcdonnell, Jessica A. Bowman, Carrie Eichelberger, Joanna Ryan, L. Conradi","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2023.2171418","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2023.2171418","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Teachers’ perceptions play a critical role in defining and giving meaning to new initiatives and policies in schools. However, very little is known about the perceptions of self-contained special educators responsible for students with significant cognitive disabilities (SCD) pertaining to the inclusion of students with SCD in general education classes and how those perceptions impact educational programming. In this qualitative study, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 special educators responsible for students with SCD who taught in self-contained classes within traditional public schools. The interview was designed to explore special educators’ perceptions pertaining to including students with SCD in general education classes and possible personal and environmental factors that may influence their perceptions. The findings suggest that self-contained special educators responsible for students with SCD are tentatively supportive of including their students in general education classes. However, several factors (e.g., lack of support, student abilities and skills, general educator attitudes) and reservations appeared to impact special educators’ decision-making pertaining to including their students with SCD in general education classes.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43084937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-16DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2022.2158087
Kristin L. Sayeski, Emily A. Reno, Jillian M. Thoele
ABSTRACT Since the introduction of response-to-intervention as a process for identifying specific learning disabilities and the widespread adoption of multi-tiered systems of support as a framework for instructional delivery, the role of the special educator has become blurred. Specifically, special educators have struggled to identify their role across tiers of instruction. Often working in the direction of general educators, moving from less intensive to more intensive instructional supports, special educators can inadvertently fail to address instructional and behavioral needs indicated by a student’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance. The purpose of this article is to operationalize the construct of specially designed instruction, which begins rather than ends with the identification of specialized intervention supports, and provide a framework for planning to ensure the delivery of meaningful instruction for students with learning disabilities across settings and circumstances.
{"title":"Specially Designed Instruction: Operationalizing the Delivery of Special Education Services","authors":"Kristin L. Sayeski, Emily A. Reno, Jillian M. Thoele","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2022.2158087","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2022.2158087","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Since the introduction of response-to-intervention as a process for identifying specific learning disabilities and the widespread adoption of multi-tiered systems of support as a framework for instructional delivery, the role of the special educator has become blurred. Specifically, special educators have struggled to identify their role across tiers of instruction. Often working in the direction of general educators, moving from less intensive to more intensive instructional supports, special educators can inadvertently fail to address instructional and behavioral needs indicated by a student’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance. The purpose of this article is to operationalize the construct of specially designed instruction, which begins rather than ends with the identification of specialized intervention supports, and provide a framework for planning to ensure the delivery of meaningful instruction for students with learning disabilities across settings and circumstances.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"31 1","pages":"198 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48904260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-12DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2022.2156868
Yi-Chen Wu, M. Thurlow, David R. Johnson
ABSTRACT What we know about transition-age ELs with disabilities comes from a limited number of studies and reports. These students face multiple obstacles to achieving the benchmarks of post-school success, including coming from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds and having lower academic achievement than other students with disabilities. This study analyzed National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 data to explore parents’ expectations for their child’s future goal aspirations, including postsecondary education, independent living, and financial independence for English learners (ELs) with disabilities and compared results with non-ELs with disabilities. Results showed parent expectations varied by disability category and post-school goals. Also, parents of ELs with disabilities, compared to non-ELs with disabilities, had higher expectations for their child to be financially independent by age 30. The analysis also identified several individual and family predictors of these post-school goals for both parent groups. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
{"title":"Parent’s Post-School Goal Expectations for English Learners with Disabilities","authors":"Yi-Chen Wu, M. Thurlow, David R. Johnson","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2022.2156868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2022.2156868","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT What we know about transition-age ELs with disabilities comes from a limited number of studies and reports. These students face multiple obstacles to achieving the benchmarks of post-school success, including coming from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds and having lower academic achievement than other students with disabilities. This study analyzed National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 data to explore parents’ expectations for their child’s future goal aspirations, including postsecondary education, independent living, and financial independence for English learners (ELs) with disabilities and compared results with non-ELs with disabilities. Results showed parent expectations varied by disability category and post-school goals. Also, parents of ELs with disabilities, compared to non-ELs with disabilities, had higher expectations for their child to be financially independent by age 30. The analysis also identified several individual and family predictors of these post-school goals for both parent groups. Implications for research and practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43077541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/09362835.2022.2134868
P. Zirkel
ABSTRACT The special education literature has included a continuing line of articles and chapters that have translated for practitioners the legal meaning of the progress monitoring provisions in the successive versions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This article examines this line of publications in light of the language of the applicable statutory framework and the parallel line of judicial rulings specific to progress monitoring under the IDEA. These judicial rulings, which are the centerpiece of this analysis and which span the period from 1990 to 2021, form a continuous and consistent pattern that is severely discrepant with the characterization in the publications to date. For example, in these progress-monitoring rulings, the courts have applied the relatively relaxed analyses of either the procedural or implementation – not the substantive – category of the IDEA’s “free appropriate public education” (FAPE) obligation. Similarly, rather than treating progress monitoring as an “absolutely essential” priority for IEPs based on objective measures and high frequency, the vast majority of the rulings have been in favor of districts despite evidence of progress monitoring provisions that are either entirely absent in the IEP or do not meet such rigorous standards. Consequently, based on overlapping criteria of completeness, accuracy, and transparency, the conclusion is that the legal quality of these special education publications warrants improvement to be commensurate with their impressive level of legal quantity. The suggested improvements include not only clear differentiation between, but also a solid foundation for, legal requirements and professional recommendations. Their purpose is not just monitoring but achieving meaningful progress in the legal literacy and professional practice in educating students with disabilities.
{"title":"Legal Requirements for Progress Monitoring Under the IDEA: What Do the Courts Say?","authors":"P. Zirkel","doi":"10.1080/09362835.2022.2134868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2022.2134868","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The special education literature has included a continuing line of articles and chapters that have translated for practitioners the legal meaning of the progress monitoring provisions in the successive versions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This article examines this line of publications in light of the language of the applicable statutory framework and the parallel line of judicial rulings specific to progress monitoring under the IDEA. These judicial rulings, which are the centerpiece of this analysis and which span the period from 1990 to 2021, form a continuous and consistent pattern that is severely discrepant with the characterization in the publications to date. For example, in these progress-monitoring rulings, the courts have applied the relatively relaxed analyses of either the procedural or implementation – not the substantive – category of the IDEA’s “free appropriate public education” (FAPE) obligation. Similarly, rather than treating progress monitoring as an “absolutely essential” priority for IEPs based on objective measures and high frequency, the vast majority of the rulings have been in favor of districts despite evidence of progress monitoring provisions that are either entirely absent in the IEP or do not meet such rigorous standards. Consequently, based on overlapping criteria of completeness, accuracy, and transparency, the conclusion is that the legal quality of these special education publications warrants improvement to be commensurate with their impressive level of legal quantity. The suggested improvements include not only clear differentiation between, but also a solid foundation for, legal requirements and professional recommendations. Their purpose is not just monitoring but achieving meaningful progress in the legal literacy and professional practice in educating students with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":46668,"journal":{"name":"Exceptionality","volume":"30 1","pages":"297 - 309"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45242249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：