Fast Fact Friday: Core Academic Subjects

The IDEA refers to the No Child Left Behind for a definition of the term "core academic subjects." See 20 U.S.C. section 1401(4). No Child Left Behind provides the following definition:

CORE ACADEMIC SUBJECTS- The term core academic subjects' means English, reading or language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography.

20 U.S.C. section 7801.

The relevance of defining core academic subjects is that under the IDEA and NCLB, a special education teacher who teaches core academic subjects to students with disabilities must be "highly qualified" in the subject he/she teaches. To meet the requirements, the teacher must be "highly qualified" as a special education teacher, meaning that he/she meets the certification, education and licensing requirements under the IDEA and state law, plus meet the requirements to be considered "highly qualified" in the subjects themselves. This does not apply to teachers who are exclusively teaching students who are assessed using alternative achievement standards.

Special education teachers in self-contained classroom settings may be teaching multiple subjects to their students. The IDEA addresses this situation by setting specific standards relevant to any special education teacher who teaches two or more core academic subjects exclusively to students with disabilities. Those teachers meet applicable standards if they either (i) meet the requirements of NCLB for highly qualified teachers; (ii) for teachers who are "not new," demonstrate competence in all of the core academic subjects in which the teacher teaches in the same manner; or (iii) for teachers who are new and are "highly qualified" in math, language arts or science, demonstrate competence in other core academic subjects in which the teacher teaches. 20 U.S.C. section 1401 (10)(D).

Students with disabilities need to learn and progress in core academic subjects, and the purpose of incorporating these requirements into the IDEA was to ensure that students with disabilities have the same right to competent, qualified instruction in the core academics as their non-disabled peers.

Breaking Down the IEP: How Progress Will Be Measured

A student's IEP goals must be clearly measurable and must address that student's unique needs arising from his / her disability. Goals are the central part of an IEP; they set standards for what the child will learn and achieve under the proposed program. Essential to a parents understanding of the child's progress and the appropriateness of the program, therefore, is how progress will be reported. The IDEA requires a statement within the written IEP document regarding this.

Specifically, the IDEA requires:

"a description of how the child's progress towards meeting the annual goals... will be measured and when periodic reports on the progress the child is making toward meeting the annual goals (such as through the use of quarterly or other periodic reports, concurrent with the issuance of report cards) will be provided."
20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(1)(A)(III).

How will progress be measured?

This is closely related to the discussion of how goals should be written so that they are measurable. The starting place for determining how progress will be measured is within the goal itself - make sure it is clear what accuracy level the child will be expected to achieve to meet the goal; include a reliability indicator, such as 3 out of 4 trials, if appropriate, and make sure that the specific skills themselves are clear.

Determining "how" progress will be measured also involves deciding how information regarding progress will be gathered. Will there be specific data collection that indicates specifically how a child performed on the skill for each trial? Will classroom work samples be sufficient to track progress on a skill? Should the teacher utilize an assessment measure to indicate the child's achievement level to determine progress? The IEP team needs to consider how information will be collected, and make sure this is clear in the IEP. Although observational information may be useful for future IEP meetings, a subjective measurement of progress should be avoided as a sole indicator whenever possible.

Examples:

Child's annual goal = read 50 new sight words from a 2nd grade high frequency word list with automaticity as measured by teacher collected samples

Progress measured by: teacher samples
Teacher indicates directly on list of high frequency words the words that student reads, and adds these up. The list itself is a record of student's progress.

Child's annual goal = remain on task for at least 10 minutes during a teacher-directed desktop assignment or activity, with no less than 2 verbal prompts in 3 out of 4 trials as measured by data collection charts.

Progress is measured by:
Data collection chart
Date: 06/12
Lesson: Math
Time on task: 6 minutes
prompts: 3

When will progress be reported?

The IEP document needs to specifically identify when "periodic reports on the progress" towards the child's annual goals will be produced and provided to parents. These periodic reports can be concurrent with the issuance of report cards, but should include specific information related to the child's specific goals. Because the IDEA now only requires short term objectives for students who are provided with alternative assessment measures, it may be difficult to quantify a child's progress towards the ultimate goal for the periodic report. If objectives are included in the IEP, the periodic report can tell parents whether or not the child has met the objective for that time period. If not, then information about how the child has progressed should still be made availalble.

Providing sufficient information within a periodic report of progress goes back to the goals itself being measurable. If the goal has a clearly measurable, objective standard that can be quantified or recorded in some way, then the child's current level on that same objective standard can be reported for a periodic report.

Example:

Child's annual goal = read 50 new sight words from a 2nd grade high frequency word list with automaticity as measured by teacher collected samples

Periodic Report for First Reporting Period

periodic reports on the progress the child is making toward meeting the annual goals (such as through the use of quarterly or other periodic reports, concurrent with the issuance of report cards) will be provided

Relationship to Other Procedural Safeguards

School districts are obligated to revise a child's IEP as appropriate "to address any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals and in the general education curriculum, where appropriate." 20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(4)(A)(ii)(1). This means that if during the time period covered by an annual IEP, the student is not making expected progress, the District should convene the team to discuss whether adjustments to the goals or the program are required. It is important that the goals themselves are clearly measurable, and that there are reporting periods clearly identified for when progress will be reported, so that if the child is not making progress, the team, including parents, are aware of this. If the IEP does not clearly establish how and when progress will be measured, the team may not be aware until the next annual IEP that the child is not making adequate progress. This may cause a loss of educational benefit, in that the District thereby did not revise the IEP as appropriate to meet the child's needs and enable him/her to meet the annual goals.

Ultimately, an important purpose of making sure that the goals are measurable and that progress is reported periodically is to ensure meaningful parent participation in the process. Parents cannot fully participate in ongoing discussions regarding their child's program or annual IEP meetings if they do not know whether or not the child is making expected progress. If parents are fully informed regarding their child's progress, or lack thereof, under the special education program being provided, they are more able to understand the appropriateness of the program being offered, and to ask for additional services or supports when needed.

Breaking Down the IEP: Measurable Annual Goals

The IDEA requires the written IEP document to include measurable annual goals to address the child's unique needs. Goals are based upon the child's present levels of performance, and should drive the child's services. Therefore, goals are often consider the "core" of the student's IEP.

Specifcially, the IDEA requires:

"a statement of measurable annual goal, including academic and functional goals, designed to (aa) meet the child's needs that result from the child's disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum; and (bb) meet each of the child's other educational needs that result from the child's disability."
20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(II).

What are Annual Goals?

OSEP and the Appendix to the IDEA 1999 regulations both have defined annual goals as "statements that describe what a child with a disability can reasonably be expected to accomplish within a 12-month period, in the child's special education program." Letter to Butler, 213 IDELR 118 (1988); Notice of Interpretation, Question 4, Appendix A to 34 C.F.R. part 300 (1999 regulations).

What needs should be addressed?

Proper and complete identification of a child's unique needs is key to writing good goals for the IEP. Evaluation data, input from persons working with the child, and information about what the child should be able to do at this grade level, all may be relevant when developing proposed annual goals. If the team has considered all relevant information and drafted clearly stated and sufficiently comprehensive PLOP, then identifying areas that need to be addressed in annual goals will be much easier. By definition, goals should address a child's unique needs related to the following:

(1) IEP must include both academic and functional goals

As discussed in the previous posts, IEP teams are now explicitly required to address both academic and functional areas when developing a program for the child. "Educational benefit" has long been defined as including both academic and non-academic areas. Since ultimately the IEP must be reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit to the student, it logically follows that all components of educational benefit should be considered when determining what goals are necessary, even if those areas are not strictly related to academic progress.

Academic goals relate to what the child will be expected to learn and accomplish in the coming year in the areas of reading and language arts, math, social studies and history, and science.

Functional goals related to what progress the child will be expected to make in the coming year in areas, skills and activities that are non-academic and related to the child's day to day functional skills, like behavior, communication, independent living skills, social skills, etc.

(2) "Enable the child to make progress in the general education curriculum"

The IDEA specifically states that goals must be included for each child with a disability to meet the child's needs arising from the disability in order to enable that child to make progress in general education curriculum. There is nothing in the statute that indicates that this provision only requires to students who are in a general education classroom, or to students with a certain level of general intelligence and ability, or that it does not apply if the student has a "severe" disabilty.

The decision of what progress towards general education curriculum would be appropriate is of course an individualized decision based upon factors related to that individual child. Certainly, not every child will be able to meet grade level standards. However, every child can be given the opportunity to make progress in general education curriculum appropriate to their individual strengths and needs. Because this debate is a frequent issue in IEP meetings, it has been addressed more thoroughly in a previous blog post.

(3) "Meet other educational needs that arise from the disability"

The term "educational" is broader than merely academics. Educational benefit can include both academic and non-academic areas. It is important to remember this framework when considering the need for goals to "meet each of the child's other educational needs."

Other educational needs may include speech, language or communication deficits, social skills difficulties, behavioral needs, recreation and leisure, independent living, motor skills, etc. Focus on the "big picture" of what an educational program should be accomplishing, and utilize assessment data, PLOP, and input from team members to determine what areas need to be addressed.

Remember that the IDEA says "each of the child's other educational needs," not "the most important needs." The IEP team needs to make sure that the goals are attainable and appropriate, and it therefore may not be appropriate to have a huge amount of goals. However, when the District says "we only write goals to address the most important areas," or "we have to prioritize and pick only some areas of need to address," this isn't exactly conducive with the IDEA's language. Instead, the IEP needs to include a goal for each area of educational need a child has that arises from that child's disability.

What does it mean for goals to be "measurable?"

To be measurable, a goal must be written clearly with sufficient information to allow an objective person to understand what skill is being addressed and exactly what should be accomplished in order for the child to reach the goal. IEP teams should be wary of goals that are vague or that contain broad generalized statements about "improving" in an area or "increasing" a skill, without specifying what that means. A goal that says that the child will "improve" in his/her skills in a specific area provides little more information than what area of need is being addressed. Ask yourself how the child will improve, how it will be demonstrated, and what specific skill is being addressed.

If the IEP team has developed clear statements of the child's PLOP, writing measurable goals will be much easier. The PLOP can be used to establish clear baselines as a "starting place" for the proposed goals. If the baseline is clear, it is easier to determine how to write an annual goal that will ensure progress and will be measurable. For example, if the PLOP indicates that the child's current fluency rate is at 50 words per minute, the IEP team has enough information to draft a goal that would be at a higher rate, and has specific enough data to make that goal measurable (i.e. the child will read at a rate of 100 words per minute).

Avoid goals that are subjective, because these will not be clearly measurable by whomever is implementing the IEP. A good point of reference is to think "if I had to take this IEP to a new school district who had not been involved in this meeting, would they know how to implement this goal and measure it?"

Examples:
Measurable Goal: Child will engage in a conversation with a peer for 5 minutes, demonstrating at least two conversational turns and remaining on topic.
Vague / Not Measurable: Child will improve conversational skills with peers.

Measurable Goal: Child will demonstrate ability to read 50 new grade level sight words with 90% accuracy in 3 out of 4 trials.
Vague / Not Measurable: Child will increase reading of sight words.

What is the relationship between goals and services, instruction & the provision of FAPE?

IEP goals should drive specialized instruction and related services. The goals establish what the child is expected to learn and accomplish within the special education program. Once the goals have set forth a roadmap for the child, the IEP team must consider what specialized instruction and related services will be required to get there.

An IEP that is found to have insufficient or inappropriate goals will in many cases be found to deny a student FAPE. This is because when the IEP goals are not based on the child's needs, the program itself likely will not be able to meet the child's needs and provide educational benefit. Goals, therefore, have vital importance to the development of an overall appropriate program for an individual child!

Breaking Down the IEP: Present Levels of Performance

When an IEP team is convened to discuss the program and services for a student with a disability, the school district is responsible for ensuring that a written document is created. An IEP is defined as "a written statement for each child with a disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised in accordance with [the IDEA]." 20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(1)(A). There are specifically delineated portions of this "written statement" that make up required content for an IEP.

The first on the IDEA's list of required content is "present levels of performance;" often referred to by its acronym, "PLOP."

PLOP means:

"A statement of the child's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, including (aa) how the child's disability affects the child's involvement and progress in the general education curriculum; (bb) for preschool children, as appropriate, how the disability affects the child's participation in appropriate activities; and (cc) for children with disabilities who take alternative assessments aligned to alternative achievement standards, a description of benchmarks or shortterm objectives."

Present levels of academic achievement

Academic achievement refers to a child's performance in academic areas, including reading and language arts, math, science, and history or social studies. This refers to what your child knows and can do at the present time as related to the core academic subjects. PLOP in academic achievement should provide the team with information about what the child's skills are. How are the child's reading and math skills as compared to the general education curriculum standards? Did your child meet his / her previous goals related to academics? What level were those goals set at, and if your child did not meet the goals, what level did he/she reach? What does your child's report card say about their performance?

Present levels of functional performance

Functional performance refers to a child's skills and achivement in areas that are "not considered academic or related to a child's academic achievement." See Commentary, Federal Register, at page 46661. Functional skills include areas such as daily living activities, motor skills and communication. Because PLOP must address both academic and functional performance, the IEP team needs to consider all areas of need arising from the child's disability when developing PLOP, regardless of if these areas directly impact academic achievement. Consider factors such as your child's ability to communicate in the classroom and with peers, your child's motor skills needs, any difficulties with organization or work habits, how your child socializes, etc. Ask the teachers for input about how your child "functions" on a day to day basis as compared to other kids his/her age.

How the child's disability impacts involvement and progress in general education

The requirement that PLOP specifically address how the disability impacts involvement and progress in general education curriculum should be considered when developing both PLOP for academic performance and PLOP for functional performance. When considering a child's academic achievement, for example, it is important to compare this to what the child is expected to do / learn in order to make progress in general education curriculum. If your child's disability affects his / her reading skills to the extent that this impacts her progress towards general education curriculum standards, for example, this needs to be noted in the PLOP. In the areas of functional skills, any functional performance deficit that affects how the child can participate in the curriculum should be noted as such. Additionally, the IEP document should consider, as a whole, how the disability impacts involvement in general education. Does the child's disability require a specialized setting or specialized instruction that cannot be provided in general education? Does the child's disability require modifications to the general education curriculum? These are issues the team should be considering when developing PLOP.

Preschool children

There is nothing in the law that states that IEPs for preschool children do not have the same requirements for content as for other students. There is, however, a consideration in the requirement for PLOP regarding preschool children in terms of access to age appropriate activities. For preschool children, it may be the case that they are not yet being taught "general education curriculum," and there may not be specific curriculum standards that apply. Instead, there may be "readiness skills" and developmentally appropriate activities, designed to get the child ready for a Kindergarten program. The IDEA recognizes this, and requires that when appropriate, the IEP document include a statement of PLOP related to how the child's disability impacts his/her ability to be involved in age appropriate activities.

Alternative achievement standards

Prior to IDEA 2004, the IEP was required to include a statement of goals that includes objectives or benchmarks towards meeting those goals for all students with disabilities. IDEA 2004 removed this language under "goals" and instead included additional language under the provision for PLOP. Students who are assessed using "alternative measures" that are aligned to alternative achievement standards, rather than general education standards, require shortterm benchmarks in order to measure their progress towards goals. Although this is now included under PLOP, it will be fully discussed in the next blog post in this series, which addresses goals.

Importance of PLOP to the IEP process

A clear and accurate statement of a child's present levels of performance, both in academic and functional areas, is the foundation for establishing a good IEP. PLOP provides the team with a baseline from which to develop goals, consider necessary services, discuss appropriate specialized instruction, and ultimately develop a program that will meet the child's unique needs and provide educational benefit. If the PLOP is vague, inaccurate or incomplete, then the IEP will likely not address each of the child's unique needs arising from his/her disability.

A sufficient statement of the child's PLOP is also critical for meaningful parent participation. Without accurate and complete information about how a child is performing and functioning, it would be impossible for a parent to be fully informed and to meaningfully participate in discussions regarding the child's unique special education needs.

For example, in an Oregon case, the ALJ concluded that the school district denied FAPE to the student, based in part on the finding that the district repeatedly failed to report the student's current performance or issue reports that documented progress towards IEP goals. The ALJ noted that mere identification that the child had "ongoing educational difficulties" was not enough for a statement of PLOP, noting that the parent did not have enough information regarding how the PLOP was related to the child's IEP goals. The ALJ found fault with the district's "recycling" of PLOP from year to year without updating the information.
Ashland School District, 47 IDELR 82 (SEA OR 2007).

In a New Mexico case, an appeal officer found that the District had denied FAPE to a student because the parents were denied meaningful participation in the IEP process. The IEP documents failed to include a statement of the student's present levels of performance, particularly in the area of reading, and did not include adequate information to allow the parent to fully participate in the development of a program. Because the IEP lacked information about the student's PLOP, parent had an erroneous belief that he continued to require a restrictive placement in a separate facility to recieve adequate specialized instruction. Although the district "recommended" a less restrictive setting, it continued to place the child in the specialized program due to the parent's request. The judge noted that this placement was inappropriate, and that the parent only requested it because of the lack of information she was provided regarding her child's current academic performance.
Rio Rancho Pub. Schs., 40 IDELR 140 (SEA NM 2003).

How specific should PLOP be?

The statement of PLOP should be specific enough to clearly establish with sufficient detail what the child's particular needs are in each area. Vague statements are not sufficient to lay an adequate foundation for a good IEP. The child's levels of performance need to be clearly defined so that anyone reading the IEP and working with the child has sufficient information to be able to address those needs and measure progress.

For example, in a New York case, the state review officer determined that the school district's IEP was inappropriate because the document did not contain sufficient details regarding the child's present levels of performance and specific special education needs. The IEP in question stated that the child had "difficulties" in motor skills and functional communication, but did not identify any specific difficulties that arose for this child. The vagueness of the statement of PLOP meant that the goals were not designed to match the student's actual needs, and therefore there was not a sufficient "foundation" for development of an appropriate program.
In re Child with a Disability, 50 IDELR 236 (SEA NY 2008)

Where information is derived from

Information contained within a statement of PLOP may come from a variety of sources, such as progress reports from previous IEP goals, report cards demonstrating a student's academic achievement in the classroom, informal observations, data collection, formal evaluations, teacher input, etc. Remember those things that the District must "consider" when developing the IEP, as discussed in the previous post. The District should take into consideration a variety of sources of input to develop PLOP that accurately, completely and specifically identifies the child's strengths and weaknesses in each area.

Parent participation in development of PLOP

Parent participation is critical to the development of a procedurally and substantively appropriate IEP, and there is nothing to support an argument that parents should not participate in the development of PLOP. As discussed in the previous post, the "concerns of the parent" are a part of what must be considered when developing the IEP. If the parent concerns are relevant to what the child's current levels of performance and achievement are, it would be appropriate for these concerns to be considered when developing PLOP. On a logical basis, it would be irrational for the District not to include relevant and accurate information provided by the parent in relation to what the child currently knows and can do.

Parents should prepare for the IEP meeting by carefully considering for themselves what the child's PLOP are in areas related to academics and functional skills. Look over information you have been provided throughout the year from your child's teachers and service providers. Make sure you have copies of any statewide or standardized testing results, report cards, progress reports, and evaluations. Make a list of what you see as important performance and achievement information from this information, and use that as a "checklist" when discussing PLOP with the IEP team.

Finally, the discussion of a child's PLOP can be a good indicator of how the remainder of the IEP team meeting is going to go. If the District is not allowing parents to actively participate and provide input, or is not giving the parents sufficient information, during this part, that may be an indication that the District is not going to have a meaningful meeting that involves everyone and develops an appropriate program. Disagreements are certainly possible regarding what a child's actual levels of performance and achievement are, a meaningful discussion of those disagreements should take place. If the parent believes that the IEP document is not accurately describing a child's needs and PLOP, it is likely that the parent also won't believe the IEP is designed to meet the child's needs. Ultimately, everyone needs to be proactive, information needs to be fully shared, and sufficient details need to be provided so that the PLOP really does lay the foundation for an appropriate program.

Breaking Down the IEP: What Must Be Considered?

An IEP is an individualized plan developed by a team of individuals to address a child's unique needs and provide for goals, services and special education to meet those needs. Because it is individualized, inherently, specific information about the individual child must be discussed and taken into consideration. This information can come from a variety of sources, including evaluation data, classroom data, parents, teachers, etc. Because the IEP is developed by a team of individuals, all of those members should have input into the development of the IEP, based on their knowledge of the child and their specific role in the process.

The IDEA includes a specific list for what the IEP team is required to take into consideration. See 20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(3).

(i) the strengths of the child

Although the child's unique needs, i.e. deficits, are the core of what must be addressed in an IEP, it is important that the team take into consideration the child's strengths as well. An individual child's specific strengths can be very relevant in the discussion of what type of specialized instruction would work for the child, how the child can be included in general education, etc. It may not be appropriate, for example, for a child who has a strength in math skills to be in a specialized setting the entire day, rather than being included for a math class.

Remember that the "strengths of the child" should be based on that particular child, not solely on what may be considered a "strength" for that age or grade level. This is called a "relative strength."

(ii) the concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child

Consideration of the concerns of the parents in the development of the IEP is, in my opinion, one of the most important provisions of the IDEA. Other portions of the IDEA echo this requirement, instructing school districts to include parents in the IEP team and to include parents in any team that makes a placement decision about their child. Procedural safeguards and other requirements are all based on this central idea: that parent participation is key to the development of an appropriate IEP.

Meaningful parent participation is not just about whether the school district invites the parents to the meeting and whether the parents show up. The requirement that the "concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child" indicates the importance of meaningful parent participation - their concerns must actually be taken into consideration by the IEP team when the IEP is being developed.

IEP teams and school district representatives can only take into consideration parent concerns if they have an open mind about those concerns, and about any requests that the parents may make to the team and district. The IEP team should listen to the parents, and should have a meaningful discussion about any concerns raised, including how those concerns will be addressed in the IEP.

Parents should be proactive in preparing for participation in IEP meetings. Make a list of your concerns related to your child's education. Consider what concerns you have regarding your child's social skills, peer interactions, academic achievement, attention and behavior, and other areas relevant to the IEP development. Consider how those concerns relate to other data and information you have; like, for instance, if your concerns regarding your child's academic achievement are supported by findings from a recent assessment or by progress reports from the child's classroom. Finally, think about what you would like to see included in the IEP to address these areas, and whether you have any concerns about the provision of any specific instructional programs or services. These are the types of concerns that should be shared with the team in order for meaningful parent participation to occur.

(iii) the results of the initial evaluation or most recent evaluation of the child

Evaluations are critical to the development of an appropriate IEP that truly addresses the child's unique educational needs. The IDEA specifies that to be appropriate, an evaluation or assessment must be sufficiently comprehensive to identify each of the student's unique special education and related services needs. The school district must utilize evaluation tools and strategies that are effective in

gather[ing] relevant functional, developmental and academic information... that may assist in determining... the content of the child's individualized education program, including information related to enabling the child to be involved in and progress in the general educatin curriculum, or for preschool children, to participate in appropriate activities.

20 U.S.C. section 1414(b)(2)(A)

Evaluation data should be useful in determining what the child's unique needs are, what their present levels of performance (PLOP) are, what changes should be made to any specialized instruction or related services being provided, what areas need to be addressed in goals, and what supports a child may need to be involved in general education.

The IEP team is required to consider information from the evaluation of the child, including the initial evaluation or most recent reevaluation conducted by the school district. Because of this requirement, it may not be adviseable in many circumstances for parents to agree to waive triennial re-evaluations by the school district when the time arises for those evaluations. The IEP team needs current evaluation data regarding a child's unique needs, and that evaluation data is not solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility, but also for guiding the team about what the program must address in order to be approrpiate.

It is also important to note that elsewhere in the IDEA, there is a requirement that the results of any independent educational evaluation, whether funded by the school district or by parents, also be taken into consideration. 34 C.F.R. section 300.502(c) specifies that the results of an independent educational evaluation or private evaluation "must be considered... in any decision made with respect to the provsion of FAPE to the child." Since the IEP team is making decisions with regards to the provision of FAPE, the IEP team is charged with considering the independent assessment.

(iv) the academic, developmental and functional needs of the child

Ultimately, the core of what the IEP team needs to consider is the unique needs of the child, including academic, developmental and functional needs. In each of these areas, the child's unique needs must be considered in relation to how those needs affect the child's ability to access an educational benefit, with the understanding that "educational" means more than merely academic progress.

Academic needs include how your child performs in core academic subjects, and may also include how other areas affect your child's ability to learn academic skills (like attention, behavior, etc). Evaluation data and teacher input are critical for identifying and determining a child's unique needs in the area of academics. It is important to look both at relative deficits, that is areas that are deficit based on this particular child's other strengths and overall abilities, as well as more broad areas of deficit, including those areas that are deficit when compared to what the child should be expected to do at this grade or age level. In order to truly understand a child's academic needs, all of this information should be considered.

One place to look for guidance in determining your child's academic needs is your state's academic content standards or grade level curriculum standards, especially if your child's IEP states that he/she is expected to meet grade level standards. Are there areas identified as expectations for your child's grade level that he/she struggles with? What about the curriculum standards for the grade level below; are there standards that your child has not yet met or made progress towards? Although the District would not ulitmately be required to ensure that your child meet all grade level content standards, this information can still be useful as a point of discussion when identifying a child's academic needs.

Developmental needs can include areas related to child development appropriate to your child's age, such as motor skills, language and communication, cognition, and social skills. Think about the things that you tracked when your child was a toddler, the "developmental milestones." These are generally within broader areas that are under the umbrella of "developmental skills." If your child has a delay in the development of age-appropriate skills in these areas, then that may be an indication of unique need that should be considered by the IEP team.

Functional needs can include those related to deficits in skills or activities that are nonacademic, but are related to the child's ability to function in day to day life activities and routines. Functional skills are those skills, beyond academics, that a child is going to need to acquire to "make it" once he/she leaves school. Remember that one of the purposes of the IDEA is to ensure that children with disabilities are educated appropriately and thereby prepared for "further education, employment and independent living." 20 U.S.C. section 1400(d)(1). Functional skills must be developed in order to prepare students for such endeavors, and therefore need to be addressed in the IEP.

Fast Fact Friday: Specialized Instruction

Eligibility for an IEP is contingent upon (1) the child having an identified disability under one of the eligibility categories in federal and state laws, and (2) the child requiring, by reason of that disability, special education and related services. See 34 C.F.R. section 300.8(a)(1). "Special education means specially designed instruction, at no cost to the parents, to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability, including (i) instruction conducted in the classroom, in the home, in hospitals and institutions, and in other settings; and (ii) instruction in physical education." See 20 U.S.C. section 1401(29); 34 C.F.R. section 300.39(a)(1). Furthermore, special education can include related services, such as speech-language pathology, if that service is considered special education rather than a related service under state standards. See 34 C.F.R. section 300.39(a)(2).

What is "specially designed instruction?"

The IDEIA defines specially designed instruction as "adapting, as appropriate to the needs of an eligible child, the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction, (i) to address the unique needs of the child that result from the child's disability; and (ii) to ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that the child can meet the educational standards within the jurisdiction of hte public agency that apply to all children." 34 C.F.R. section 300.39(b)(3).

Through the IEP process, Districts need to consider whether adaptations are needed in the content (i.e. what is being taught), or the methodology or delivery of instruction (i.e. how it is being taught) in order for the specific child's needs to be addressed and in order for that child to have access to general education curriculum. The IEP team should also consider whether the child needs "additional specialized instruction or related services" in order to make progress towards general education curriculum. See Letter to Anonymous, OSEP 2008.

"Specially designed" means designed with the specific child in mind. Specially designed instruction can include alternative methods of teaching the same curriculum to children with disabilities as to non-disabled students. It can include modified or adapted textbooks.

Under the IDEIA, special education (including specially designed instruction) should be "based on peer reviewed research to the extent practicable." 34 C.F.R. section 300.320(a)(4). In certain cases, specially designed instruction can also include specialized instructional programs, like intensive reading programs, ABA or other methodologies, etc., if these specific instructional programs are required to meet the child's unique needs and ensure access to the general curriculum.

Goals Related to General Education Curriculum

I hear lots of interesting things at IEP meetings, and recently I've heard several comments on the theme of including goals in an IEP to address general education standards.

In one meeting, a district resource teacher stated that "the law prohibited the IEP team from including goals in an IEP that were based on what would be taught within the general education curriculum."

Another teacher stated that goals related to general education were never appropriate for a student who is "severely disabled."

A district administrator stated that if all of the goals were based on regular education standards, rather than below grade level, this meant that the child should be exited from his IEP because clearly he didn't need special education.

Yet another claimed that "this district doesn't write IEP goals related to Science because no one has a Science disability."

At each of these meetings, I have patiently explained that the law requires IEP goals to address a child's unique needs in order to enable that child to make progress towards and participate in general education curriculum, and that if a child is expected to reach regular standards, but will require specialized instruction or related services to do so, then it would be appropriate to have a goal in that area. More and more, I am seeing IEP teams dismiss this request and insist that IEP goals cannot be written to address regular education standards. So, I've been compiling some information about this issue during these last few weeks of "IEP season" and I wanted to share that information with you.

What does IDEA say about this?

The IEP document must include a statement of measurable annual goals designed to meet the child's unique needs that result from the child's disability, to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum. See 34 C.F.R. section 300.320(a)(2).

In Appendix A to Part 300, at Question 4, the Office of Education stated that a public agency is not required to include in an IEP annual goals that relate to areas of general curriculum if the child's disability does not affect the child's ability to be involved in and progress towards the general curriculum in that area.

Nowhere in the law is there a statement that a child's IEP cannot or should not include goals related to the general education curriculum. Further, there is no disclaimer stating that the requirement that goals be included to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general educaiton curriculum does not apply if the child is severely disabled.

When should the IEP address general education curriculum standards?

An IEP should include goals for areas related to the general education curriculum if the student requires special education or related services in order to make progress or participate in that specific area.

Remember that the IDEA defines special education as specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of the child. Specially designed instruction is defined as adapting as approrpiate to the needs of the child, the content, methodology or delivery of instruction to address the unique needs of the child that result from the child's disability and to ensure access of the child to the general curriculum so that the child can meet the educational standards within the jurisdiction of the public agency that apply to all children. 34 C.F.R. section 300.39(a)&(b).

Look at your state's or district's expected standards for each grade level. (Click here for California Content Standards). Each state has content standards for each grade level that define what students are expected to learn in each academic content area. The question is not whether the ultimate goal is for your child to reach the same level at the end of the school year as the other students; the question is whether your child's disability impacts his/her ability to reach that level. If it does, then it may be appropriate to include a goal for that skill. Look to current evaluation data to determine what areas of the curriculum may be affected by your child's disability.

Start addressing this in the Present Levels of Performance (PLOP), and use that information to determine if a goal is needed. The IEP's statement of PLOP must include the student's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance including how the student's disability affects the student's involvement and progress in the general education curriculum. 34 C.F.R. section 300.320(a)(1). For each area under PLOP, there should be a statement of how the student is currently performing as related to the grade level expectations based upon the content standards. This information can come from a variety of sources, including assessment data, classroom records, standardized testing, teacher input, progress reports, etc. Look at the PLOP to determine where there are areas where there is a "gap" between the grade level expectations and the child's functioning level.

What is the importance of including general education expectations in the IEP?

There is a preference in law and policy for including students with disabilities to the maximum extent possible in the regular education setting. Addressing general education curriculum expectations for students with disabilities, however, goes beyond the LRE debate. This issue is about the underlying goal of the IDEA to end the practice of "lowering expectations" for students with disabilities. Its about the ultimate goal of ensuring that students are educated in such a way that they are prepared for the world when they leave high school.

The IDEA "findings" state that "the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by... having high expectations for such children and ensuring their access to the general curriculum to the maximum extent possible, in order to meet the developmental goals and the challenging expectations that have been established for all children and... be prepared to lead productive and independent adult lives..." 20 U.S.C. section 1400(c).

No Child Left Behind reiterates this finding, noting that its purpose is to "ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging state academic achievement standards and state academic assessments." It goes on to indicate that this purpose can be achieved by "meeting the educational needs of low-achieving students, including students with disabilities." 20 U.S.C. section 6301.

Reflect on these considerations as you consider the appropriateness of IEP goals related to general education curriculum. A district team member once told me that the only way she would write an IEP goal related to a grade level math standard for a particular student was if the expectation was reduced from learning 30 numbers (as stated in the standard) to learning 15 numbers. When this kind of determination is made arbitrarily because of a misguided belief that grade level goals are not permissible, rather than based on any information about the child's actual levels of functioning, it is not conducive with meeting the purposes of the IDEA. Certainly, an arbitrary assumption that simply because a child is disabled, he could not possibly be expected to reach the grade level standard, is not "having high expectations for such children."

Ultimately, the most important thing to remember is the "I" in "IEP." The IEP must be individualized for the specific child based on his/her specific unique needs, strengths and levels of functioning, and considering information regarding how that child's specific disability affects his/her ability to progress in and participate in the general curriculum. The IEP must ensure that the child is able to make progress and receive a meaningful educational benefit. We should all be wary whenever we are told that "this district doesn't write those goals" or that inclusion of general education standards would "never be appropriate." Ultimately, whether the IEP should include a goal that is related to a general education content standard is an IEP team decision, and should be based on the specific scenario rather than any preconceived notions about the issue.

What About Methodology?

Methodology is a hot topic in cases, IEP meetings and discussions all across the country. With a plethora of programs available, emphasis on research, and an influx of stimulus package money intended to be used for programs and curriculum, the timing is ripe for more and more methodology disputes to emerge. We see these issues come up everyday, in situations ranging from parents who initially come to us because they want a specific methodology to due process cases involving school districts pretermining methodology. Mandy and I have given two presentations specifically on this topic recently.

Parents think of methodology in terms of programs and curriculum choices. Examples of particular "methodologies" are Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) or Discrete Trial Training (DTT) for students with autism, Lindamood Bell, Orton-Gillingham or the Wilson method for students with reading deficits. The list could go on and on. With a focus on research based interventions in not only IDEIA but also in No Child Left Behind, there are new programs or "methodologies" emerging all the time.

Here are some thoughts and ideas on these issues:

Methodology disputes arise when the disagreement is in regards to two or more options that could each appropriately meet the child's unique needs. As advocates and attorneys, we can go a long way towards dealing with these disputes simply by learning to anticipate and recognize when a school district is going to claim that the issue is solely related to methodology. School districts are given discretion in these cases, and are generally permitted to choose what methodology to employ, so long as the method chosen provides the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Anticipating these disputes and reframing the issue as being focused on FAPE, rather than a choice among programs, from the very beginning, is an excellent advocacy strategy.

Asking questions about the methodology choice can be very useful. The IEP team should be able to discuss what research exists to support the use of a particular program, who is trained to implement the program, and why a program was chosen over other methods. There may be perfectly valid justifications for a school district's choice, but parents need to understand that information in order to meaningfully participate in the IEP process.

Even though school districts have discretion in choices of methodology, that does not mean that procedural requirements under the law don't apply! School districts are not permitted to predetermine methodology for a particular student before an IEP discussion about the student's unique needs. They are also not permitted to have a blanket policy to refuse specific methodologies or programs.

Finally, remember that everyone needs to keep an open mind in these cases. Often both parents and school districts have very strong opinions about what will or won't work for a particular child. School districts could prevent a lot of these cases from being litigated if they would simply listen with an open mind to what parents and their experts are saying about the program and the child's unique needs. Parents should also keep an open mind about possible programs and about how those programs may possibly benefit their child. Not only might this result in preventing the dispute from ever arising, but it will also go a long way to helping the parents present their case down the line if in fact it results in litigation.