Demonstrate Knowledge Of Procedures For Conducting Assessment To Address The Individual Needs Of Students With Disbilities

Front 1

Pre-referral team

Back 1

These teams provide support to teachers and gather data prior to determining the need for an evaluation. Interventions prior to an evaluation are not just a good idea; they are mandated by IDEA (2004), The law does not specify how long interventions need to be implemented, just that enough data needs to be collected to determine that a child’s difficulty learning is not due to a lack of appropriate instruction.

Front 2

Response to Intervention (RTI)

Back 2

• is a multi-tier approach to the early identification and support of students with learning and behavior needs.
• The RTI process begins with high-quality instruction and universal screening of all children in the general education classroom.
• Struggling learners are provided with interventions at increasing levels of intensity to accelerate their rate of learning. These services may be provided by a variety of personnel, including general education teachers, special educators, and specialists. Progress is closely monitored to assess both the learning rate and level of performance of individual students. Educational decisions about the intensity and duration of interventions are based on individual student response to instruction. RTI is designed for use when making decisions in both general education and special education, creating a well-integrated system of instruction and intervention guided by child outcome data.
  

Front 3

Ongoing student assessment

Back 3

Throughout the RTI process, student progress is monitored frequently to examine student achievement and gauge the effectiveness of the curriculum. Decisions made regarding students’ instructional needs are based on multiple data points taken in context over time.

Front 4

Tiered instruction

Back 4

multi-tier approach is used to efficiently differentiate instruction for all students. The model incorporates increasing intensities of instruction offering specific, research-based interventions matched to student needs.

Front 5

Tier 1: High-Quality Classroom Instruction, Screening, and Group Interventions

Back 5

All students are screened on a periodic basis to establish an academic and behavioral baseline and to identify struggling learners who need additional support. Students identified as being “at risk” through universal screenings and/or results on state- or districtwide tests receive supplemental instruction during the school day in the regular classroom.

The length of time for this step can vary, but it generally should not exceed 8 weeks. During that time, student progress is closely monitored using a validated screening system such as curriculum-based measurement. At the end of this period, students showing significant progress are generally returned to the regular classroom program. Students not showing adequate progress are moved to Tier 2.

Front 6

Tier 2: Targeted Interventions

Back 6

Intensity varies across group size, frequency and duration of intervention, and level of training of the professionals providing instruction or intervention. These services and interventions are provided in small-group settings in addition to instruction in the general curriculum. In the early grades (kindergarten through 3rd grade), interventions are usually in the areas of reading and math. A longer period of time may be required for this tier, but it should generally not exceed a grading period. Students who continue to show too little progress at this level of intervention are then considered for more intensive interventions as part of Tier 3.

Front 7

Tier 3: Intensive Interventions and Comprehensive Evaluation

Back 7

• At this level, students receive individualized, intensive interventions that target the students’ skill deficits.
• Students who do not achieve the desired level of progress in response to these targeted interventions are then referred for a comprehensive evaluation and considered for eligibility for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004).
• The data collected during Tiers 1, 2, and 3 are included and used to make the eligibility decision.
• It should be noted that at any point in an RTI process, IDEA 2004 allows parents to request a formal evaluation to determine eligibility for special education.
• An RTI process cannot be used to deny or delay a formal evaluation for special education.
  

Front 8

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

Back 8

In 1997, IDEA was reauthorized (P.L. 105-17). The IDEA Amendments of 1997 (IDEA '97) require states receiving IDEA funds to ensure that a free appropriate public education is made available to children with disabilities in mandatory age ranges in the least restrictive environment. One of the major emphases in the reauthorization of IDEA is that students with disabilities must have access to the general curriculum, that is, the same curriculum as for nondisabled students and be held to challenging performance standards. Thus, the provisions in IDEA '97 regarding the participation of students with disabilities in general state and district-wide assessment programs, with appropriate accommodations and modifications in administration, where necessary, promote these important statutory purposes.

Front 9

WA-AIM Alternative Assessment

Back 9

The Access Point Frameworks and the performance task requirements and is thenfollowed by step-by-step directions for administration.

Front 10

FBA

Back 10

The Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) is recommended when a pattern of negative behaviors occur. The FBA is a process for data collection to identify the possible cause (trigger) of the problem behavior and to identify strategies to address those behaviors. The FBA provides the basis for the development of the positive behavioral intervention plan (PBIP) that focuses on teaching new behavioral skills; or, the FBA could lead the team to determine that there is not a pattern of behavior that can be addressed in a behavior plan.

Front 11

Parts of a FBA

Back 11

• Student’s Strength)
• Describe the student’s behavioral strengths, such as positive interactions with staff, ignoring the inappropriate behavior of peers, accepts responsibility, etc.2)
• Description of Behavioral) describe the frequency, duration, and intensity of the behavior(s).b)
• Occurrences section can also be used to document frequency and duration.
• c) Level of seriousness: distracting, disruptive and/or destructive should also be noted.
• d) Setting(s): Provide a description in which the behavior occurs, i.e.-physical setting, time of day, persons involved, etc.3)
• Antecedent(s)a)
• Identify and describe relevant events that preceded the behavior)
• Educational Impact) provide a description of the result of the behavior (i.e. – removed from class, not able to complete assignments/test, etc.), and the impact on the student, peers, and the instructional environment.
• 5) Other Conditions
• a) Identify any other factors/variables that may affect the behavior, such as medication, weather, diet, sleep, substance abuse, attendance, social factors, etc.
• 6) Prior Interventions
• a) Provide a historical background of behavioral interventions that have been implemented in the past, including the date(s) of implementation, length of intervention, the impact of the intervention on the student’s behavior, etc. A data summary could be attached here.
• 7) Hypothesis of Behavioral Functiona) Provide the team’s hypothesis of the relationship between the behavior and the environment in which it occurs- what function is this behavior serving for the student? What is the student trying to get? What is he/she trying to avoid?
• b) The information from the hypothesis can be promoted to the PBIP
• 8) Recommendations: This section allows the team to recommend:
• a) Alternative behavior
• b) Setting event strategies
• c) Antecedent Strategies
• d) Teaching Strategies
• e) Consequences Strategies
• 9) At this point it may be apparent that the behavior cannot be influenced in the school setting. In such an instance, alternates to a PBIP, such as drug and alcohol counseling, family working with their family doctor to adjust medications, etc. should be discussed and documented in a prior notice, and/or in the 'actions' section of the MDR.
  

Front 12

Individualized Family Service Plans

Back 12

• IFSP focuses on the child and family and the services that afamily needs to help them enhance the development of theirchild.
• An IFSP is based on an in-depth assessment of the child’sneeds and the needs and concerns of the family. It contains1) information on the child’s present level of developmentin all areas; 2) outcomes for the child and family; and 3)services the child and family will receive to help themachieve the outcomes
  

Front 13

Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA)

Back 13

On December 3, 2004, Congress enacted the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). Its purpose is to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living.

The most important aspects of the law are the mandate that every eligible student has appropriate measurable postsecondary goals based upon age appropriate transition assessments related to training, education, employment, and, where appropriate, independent living skills and a statement of needed transition services (including a course of study) incorporated into his or her Individualized Education Program (IEP) no later than age 16 (or younger, if determined appropriate by the IEP team).

Front 14

Transition Plan

Back 14

A transition plan is the section of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) that outlines transition goals and services for the student. The transition plan is based on a high school student’s individual needs, strengths, skills, and interests. Transition planning is used to identify and develop goals which need to be accomplished during the current school year to assist the student in meeting his post-high school goals.

Front 15

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 04)

Back 15

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 04) requires that in the first IEP that will be in effect when the student turns 16 years of age, his annual IEP must include a discussion about transition service needs (some states may mandate that the process start even earlier). A statement of those needs, based upon his transition assessment and future goals, must then be written into his IEP. IDEA 04 mandates that the annual IEP meeting focus on more specific planning and goal setting for the necessary transition services. Factors to be included are: academic preparation, community experience, development of vocational and independent living objectives, and, if applicable, a functional vocational evaluation. The agreed upon plans must then be documented in the student’s IEP. The law also requires that a statement of the student’s transition goals and services be included in the transition plan. Schools must report to parents on the student’s progress toward meeting his transition goals.

Front 16

Assistive Technology Devices

Back 16

A range of technology solutions is available to support student performance, achievement, and independence in the following areas: academics and learning aids, aids to daily living, assistive listening and environmental aids for the hearing impaired and deaf, augmentative communication, computer access, leisure and recreation, seating, positioning, mobility, and vision.

Front 17

Instructional Scaffolding

Back 17

Instructional scaffolding is a learning process designed to promote a deeper level of learning. Scaffolding is the support given during the learning process which is tailored to the needs of the student with the intention of helping the student achieve his/her learning goals (Sawyer, 2006).

Front 18

A 504 PLAN

Back 18

A 504 PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE:Specifics on how the modifications or accommodations will be provided and by whom.Name of the person who will be responsible for ensuring that all components of the plan are implemented (case manager).Be distributed to all of the child’s teachers, specialists, and support staff.Be placed in the child’s cumulative file.

Front 19

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

Back 19

The right to inspect and review the student's education records maintained by the school;The right to request that a school amend the student’s education records;The right to consent in writing to the disclosure of personally identifiable information from the student's education record, except under certain permitted situation; and The right to file a complaint with the Family Policy Compliance Office (FPCO) regarding an alleged violation under FERPA.

Front 20

The Arc

Back 20

The Arc of the United States advocates for the rights and full participation of all children and adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Front 21

Americans with Disabilities Act

Back 21

provides comprehensive civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, State and local government services, and telecommunications.

Front 22

NCLB

Back 22

The law covers all states, school districts, and schools that accept Title 1 federal grants. Title 1 grants provide funding for remedial education programs for poor and disadvantaged children in public schools, and in some private programs. NCLB applies differently to Title 1 schools than to schools that do not receive Title 1 grants. However, one way or another, this law covers all public schools in all states.

Front 23

shaeffer v. Weast*

Back 23

2005- In a tst of the burden of proof for what constitutes an appropriate education, the Supreme Court ruled that IDEA forces parents, not schools, to prove that their children are not receiving FAPE in legal disputes.

Front 24

Cedar Rapis V. Garret F.

Back 24

US Supreme Court ruled that a local school distric must pay for one-on-one nursing care for medically fragile studen who required continuous monitoring of his ventilator and other health-maintenance routines. The case reaffirmed and extended the Court's ruling in the 1984 Tatro case that the schools much provide any and all health services needed for students with disabiliteis to attend school as long as performance of those services does not require a licensed physician

Front 25

Timother W. v. Rochester School District

Back 25

The U.S. appeals court upheld the literal interpretation that P.L. 94-142 requires that all children with disabilities be provided with a free, appropriate, public education, unconditionally and without exception. The three-judge appeals court overturned the decision of a district court judge, who had ruled that the local school district was not obligated to educate a 13 year old boy with multiple and severe disabilities because he could not benefit from special ed.

Front 26

Honig v. Doe *

Back 26

The court ruled that children with disabilities cannot be excluded from school for any misbehavior that is disability-related (in this case aggressive behavior against other students" on the part two "emotionally handicapped students") but that educational services could cease if the misbehavior is not related to the disability

Front 27

Cleburne V. Cleburne Living Center

Back 27

Cleburne V. Cleburne Living Center The supreme court ruled unanimously that communities cannot use a discriminatory zoning ordinance to prevent establishment of group homes for person with mental retardation

Front 28

Smith v. Robinson

Back 28

The court orded that state to pay for the placement of a chld with severe disabiliteis in a residential program and ordered the school distric to reimburse the parent's attorney's fees. The US supreme court ruled that PL 94-142 did not entitle parents to recover such fees, but Congress subsequently passed an "Attorney's Fees" bill, leading to the enactment of PL 99-372

Front 29

Irving Indevendent School District v. Tatro *

Back 29

The court ruled that catherization was necessary for a child with physical disabilities to remain in school and that it could be performed by a non physician, thus obliging the school district to provide that service

Front 30

Department of Education v. Katherine

Back 30

The court ruled that a home bound instructional program for a child with multiple health impairments id not meet the least restrictive environment standard and called for the child to be placed in a class with children without disabilities and provided with related medical services

Front 31

Abrahamson v. Hershman

Back 31

the court ruled that residential placement in a private school was necessary for a child with multiple disabilities who needed around the clock training and required the school district to pay for the private placement

Front 32

Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley*

Back 32

The was the first case based on PL 94-142 to reach the US supreme court; while denying the plaintiffs specific request, the court upheld for each child with disabilities the right to a personalized program of instruction and necessary supportive services

Front 33

Armstrong v. Kline

Back 33

The case established the right of some children with severe disabilities to an extension of the 180 day pubic school year

Front 34

Larry P, v Riles

Back 34

Larry P, v Rilesthe court ruled that IQ test used to place African American children in special classes were inappropriate because they failed to recognize the children's cultural background and the learning that took place in their homes and communities. The court ordered that IQ tests could not b used as the sole basis for placed children into special classes.

Front 35

Pennsylvania Assication for Retarded Citizens v. The commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Back 35

Pennsylvania Assication for Retarded Citizens v. The commonwealth of PennsylvaniaThis class action law suit established the right to free public education for all children with mental retardatin. The decision declared individuals in state institutions have the right to appropriate treatment within those institutions

Front 36

Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia

Back 36

Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia Seven children had been excluded from the public schools in Washington DC because of earning and behavior problems. The school district contended that it did not have enough money to provide special education programs for them. the court ruled that financial problems cannot be allowed to have a greater impact on children with disabilities than on students without disabilities and ordered the schools to readmit the children and serve them appropriately

Front 37

Diana v. State Board of Education

Back 37

Diana v. State Board of EducationA spanish speaking student in CA had been placed in a special class for children with mental retardation based on the results of intelligende tests given in English. The court ruled that children cannot be placed in special education on the basis of culturally biased tests or tests given in other than the child's native language

Front 38

Hobson v Hansen

Back 38

Hobson v Hansen The court declared the tracking system, in which children were placed into either general or special classes according to their scores on intelligence tests, unconstitutional because it discriminated against African American and poor children

Front 39

Brown v. Board of Education

Back 39

The case established the right of all children to an equal opportunity for an education

Front 40

Forest Grove School District v. T.A. (2009)

Back 40

The Supreme Court decided that IDEA allows reimbursement for private special education services, even when the child did not previously receive special education services from the public school.