Breaking Down the IEP: Explanation of Non-Participation in Regular Education

Many of the other required content components of a written IEP document are directed at how a child can and will participate in the general education curriculum and regular education environment.

To recap: PLOP must state how a child's disability affects his/her involvement and progress in the general curriculum. Goals must be included that enable the child to be involved in and progress in general curriculum. The statement of special education and related services must include those services that are required to enable the child to progress in general education curriculum as well as to participate in activities with and be educated with non-disabled peers. Supplementary aids and services must be included that allow the child to participate in general education to the maximum extent appropriate. Even supports necessary for staff can be related to a child's participation in general education.

After all of that effort to include components geared towards inclusion in general education, it logically follows that if a child is still unable to participate in general education to any extent, that should also be documented.

The IDEA requires that the written IEP document include:

"an explanation of the extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with nondisabled children in the regular class and in activities[]."

20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(1)(A)(V)

Look to your state's education code as well, as there may be additional language requiring documentation of a child's non-participation in general education. California law, for example, required the District to "document its rationale for placement in other than the pupil's school and classroom in which the pupil would otherwise attend if the pupil were not handicapped. The documentation shall indicate why the pupil's handicap prevents his or her needs from being met in a less restrictive environment even with the use of supplementary aids and services." Title 5, California Code of Regulations, section 3042(b).

In any event, the IEP document must include at a minimum an explanation that describes the extent to which the child will not participate in a regular class and activities. This can be done a number of ways. The IEP document may include a percentage of time, that indicates for X% child will be placed in general education classes, and for X% child will be placed in a special education setting. The IEP document may list specific time periods, subjects or classes, such as "child will participate in a general education class / setting for homeroom, math, science, social studies, computers, lunch and recess; child will participate in a special education classroom for language arts and reading." The IEP document needs to be clear so that those developing and implementing it understand how much the child is not to participate in the general education setting. It is also good practice to indicate the explanation, or justification, for removal from that setting.

The requirement refers not only to a regular classroom, but also to regular activities. Therefore, the extent to which the child will not be able to participate in regular education activities should also be documented in the IEP. This may include extracurricular and nonacademic activities in some cases, or may indicate recess, assemblies, etc.

These requirements are built into what is to be included in the IEP document in order to prompt the IEP team to fully consider LRE. If the IEP team needs to document an explanation for the child's nonparticipation in a general education setting, the theory is that it will give more careful consideration to the determination that the child should be removed from that setting.

Remember, like all required content, this statement should give parents enough information to fully participate in the development of the IEP. Parents need to understand when, why and how a child will be removed from the least restrictive environment in order to fully consider such an option.

Breaking Down the IEP: Statement of Program Modifications

In addition to special education, services and supplementary aids and supports that are provided directly to the child, as discussed in the previous report, the written IEP document also includes those supports that are provided to school personnel. These modifications and supports may be critical to the child's ability to progress in his/her program and to the determination of the child's least restrictive environment, and this factor should not, therefore, be glossed over by the team or in the document.

The IDEA requires the written IEP document to include:

"a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided for the child (aa) to advance toward attaining the annual goals; (bb) to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum... and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and (cc) to be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children in the activities described in [the IDEA]."
20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(1)(A)(IV)

Program Modifications

Modifications generally involve changes to the program in terms of what a child is expected to produce or demonstrate within the curriculum. A change in the child's instructional level (i.e. reducing the grade level of what is presented) or a change in the content (i.e. reducing the amount or changing what is presented) can be program modifications. Likewise, if the format or performance criteria for tests and other curriculum-based achievement measures is substantially changed, so that what is being expected / tested is actually different, that would be considered a program modifications.

Modifications can be distinguished from reasonable accommodations. Accommodations can also be important to a child's individualized plan, but do not involve substantial alteration of what is expected in terms of performance and achievement within the curriculum. Accommodations may involve differences in how material is presented, how homework is given, how a test format looks, the setting, timing, etc. Accommodations in a classroom may involve preferential seating, repeated directions and reminders, etc, to assist the child in having an equal opportunity to learn.

Supports for School Personnel

These supports include "services that are provided to the teachers of a child with a disability to help them to more effectively work with the child." Comments to 1999 regulations, at page 12,593. These services could include collaboration and communication with other providers or supports provided within the classroom. "Supports for school personnel could also include special training for the child's teacher... [such training] would normally be targeted directly at assisting the teacher to meet a unique and specific need of the child, and not simply to participate in an inservice training program that is generally available within a public agency." Comments to 1999 regulations at page 12,593.

There is a difference, therefore, in training that is provided to everyone, versus training that is provided to this particular teacher based on this particular child's needs. However, even if the teacher is attending an inservice that is available to others, there may be an argument for having this documented in the IEP. The team needs to remain focused on the unique needs of this child, and if the teacher requires additional inservice training to meet those needs, training he/she would not require if this particular child were not to be placed in his/her classroom, then this is an appropriate part of the IEP document.

Relationship to Child's Goals and Individual Program

Program modifications and supports for personnel that should be included in the written IEP are those that are necessary for the child to make progress towards annual goals and towards general education curriculum. The IEP team needs to consider the child's individual goals, and how those goals will be met. Does the teacher require training, support or assistance to be able to provide the research-based specialized instruction that the team has determined to be appropraite? If so, that may need to be added to the IEP.

Relationship to General Education Curriculum and Least Restrictive Environment

The relationship between program modifications and supports for personnel to a child's access to the general education curriculum is so important that the IDEA specifies that the general education teacher participating in the development of the IEP must be involved in the determination of such modifications and supports, as well as any supplementary aids and services provided to the child. See 34 C.F.R. section 300.324(a).

Modifications to the program may be required in order for the child to be involved in and progress in the general education curriculum, and the necessity of such modifications should not be considered evidence that general education curriculum isn't appropriate. Rather, the IEP team needs to decide, and document, what modifications are appropriate on an individual basis so that the child can access the general education curriculum in a manner that is appropriate to his / her unique needs and learning difficulties while still allowing for progress.

A school district may state that if a child requires program modifications, rather than merely accommodations in the classroom, then it is not appropriate for that child to be in a general education classroom. This position is not consistent with the IDEA's preference for least restrictive environment, or with the statute's requirement that the written IEP document include a statement of program modifications that allow for the child to be involved in the general education curriculum and to be educated and participate with nondisabled peers.

Likewise, the IEP team needs to fully consider, and clearly document, supports for personnel that are required in order for the child to access general education curriculum and to access the Least Restrictive Environment. Maybe the general education teacher needs some in-service training related to the child's disability or to behavioral strategies or communication strategies so that the child can be in the general education classroom; if the training is required specifically to meet your child's individual needs, this in-service should be documented as a support for the personnel. Perhaps the teacher needs additional assistance in the classroom, even if the child does not individually require a 1:1 aide; if so, this support should be documented in the IEP. Even something like consultative time from the child's related services providers may be considered an important support for the teacher and staff. It is important that the general education teacher be an active participant in these discussions, and that the IEP document clearly indicate what supports will be provided.

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!

Civil Rights in Education

Today is the 45th Anniversary of the signing of the Civil Rights Act. Title VI prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin in programs receiving federal financial assistance, including public schools. Ten years prior, in 1954, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Brown vs. Board of Education, finding that "racially segregated schools are inherently unequal."

Education has been called the civil rights issue of our generation. Although we have come a long way since Brown, the Civil Rights Act, the subsequent Education of the Handicapped Act, and other legislation, there are still disparities in education that affect minorities, children living in poverty or homelessness, and children with disabilities.

Disability advocates should always be aware of the civil rights movement as the foundation for what we now do. Following Brown vs. Board of Education, courts began to recognize that other types of segregation and seclusion also existed, and the issue of access to education became an issue for persons with disabilities. Parents began raising equal education opportunity as a right that existed for their children, who had been prevented from even attending schools because of their disabilities. In 1972, a consent order was entered in a case involving the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children, requiring the public school system to ensure a free public program of education and training to children with "exceptional" needs. In the same year, Mills v. Board of Education was decided in the District Court for the District of Columbia, and found that exclusion from publicly supported instruction was unconstitutional. The Mills case established a substantive entitlement to a free and suitable publicly supported education. These two cases were based upon the principle that if a public education agency undertook to educate all of the children in its area, it could not then exclude children with exceptional needs simply because they require greater resources to educate. Within these foundational cases was also established the idea of a "preference" for placement within a regular, public school placement.

Today, inclusion in a regular public school placement is still an issue of contention for many students with disabilities. The right to placement in the "least restrictive environment" is a contentious issue in many cases. Separate public schools exist where students with disabilities are placed separately from their non-disabled peers, which some argue is tantamount to segregation. On the other hand, because publicly supported education must be appropriate for the unique needs of the individual students, sometimes a separate specialized setting is required.
In the extreme, some students are still denied access to school because of the severity of their disabilities. In my own career, I have known a child whose parents' only wish was for him to be able to attend his neighborhood school, and he was never allowed to do so.

The right to equal educational opportunity and access has come a long way since 1954 for the groups of persons who have historically been denied that access. Unfortunately, on a daily basis I am reminded how far we still have to go as a society to reach the point where exclusion, discrimination, and the denial of meaningful educational benefit, be it on the basis of race, disability, or poverty, no longer exists in our schools. Only when we eliminate discrimination in schools and ensure truly equal access to a meaningful education will society as a whole move towards greater inclusion of all persons.

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.

Fast Fact Friday: Who is Required at IEP Team Meetings?

Under the law an IEP "team" is made up of one or both of the parents, at least one regular education teacher of your child if they are participating in a regular education setting, at least one special education teacher or provider, a representative of the district, someone who can interpret the instructional implication of any evaluations being reviewed and at the discretion of the Parents, other individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child, and if appropriate the child.

Example: If your child had more than one regular education teacher only one needs to be present at the meeting.

An IEP team member does not need to attend in whole or in part if the parent and the district agree that the attendance is not necessary because the member's area of curriculum or related services will not be modified or discussed in a meeting.

Example: If you're having a meeting to discuss OT services the SLP does not need to be there.

An IEP team member may be excused from attending the IEP meeting if the meeting involved modification or discussion of the member's area of the curriculum or related services if: (1) the parent and district consent to the excusal; and (2) the member submits in writing to the parent and IEP team, input into the development of the IEP prior to the meeting.

Example: If during the IEP meeting LAS services will be discussed the SLP does not have to attend if Parents consent to the excusal beforehand and the SLP submits her recommendations in writing before the meeting.

References: 20 U.S.C. section 1414(d)(1)(C)

Budget Cuts, Summer School, and Your Kid's IEP

On May 28th Los Angeles Unified School District became one of many districts across the country to announce that it was cancelling summer school due to budget cuts. Students who would normally be able to attend enrichment programs or intervention programs to address reading or math deficits will be denied such opportunities this year, and most likely next year. LAUSD's cuts mean that only credit-replacement classes for high school students (at a limited number of campuses) will be offered as "regular education summer school."

LAUSD will still of course be offering Extended School Year ("ESY") programs for students whose IEPs include such a program. ESY is mandated in the federal regulations and in California special education laws, so while summer school can be "cancelled," ESY cannot. However, Districts across the country are "limiting" ESY, and more and more parents are hearing for that a program is not available, ESY would not be appropriate, or their child does not require it. We are hearing from parents that say the District checked off a box that says the student "does not require ESY" without even discussing it, or that say that Districts are suddenly making it very difficult for students to "qualify" for ESY.

Here are some ways the budget cuts and summer school cancellations could affect your special needs child:

1) If your child is in an inclusion program (general education) during the regular school year, the District may not have a similar setting available during the summer because regular summer school has been cancelled.

* This is probably the biggest way that parents are going to see a direct impact of the cancellation of summer school. If the school district is only offering SDC's over the summer, and your child is typically in a general education setting, it may not be appropriate for him/her to attend the district's ESY program.

* The lack of an appropriate ESY setting isn't the end of the discussion, however. The IEP team needs to first consider whether the student requires ESY. If the student requires ESY to prevent regression in skills, then the IEP team needs to look at what should be offered and what will be appropriate. Deciding a student doesn't qualify because the District's program isn't appropriate is putting the cart before the horse, so to speak.

* If the District agrees that the student requires ESY, but admits it has no appropriate setting to offer, then the District is in a difficult position. You may be able to locate a private regular education program for summer school that will provide the continuation of stucture and interaction with peers that your child requires, and you may then be able to advocate for the District to fund such a setting.

* Furthermore, just because the District's placement option doesn't work for your child does not mean that the child is entitled to nothing over the summer. Look at the specific areas in which your child may regress, and see if he/she requires continuation of related services, even if he/she is not attending a summer school classroom setting. Speech therapy, occupational therapy, etc can be available even if the student does not attend ESY.

2) If your district has limited ESY participation by applying a difficult "standard," you may have a difficult time demonstrating the need for a summer program.

* The typical standard is California cases is that ESY must be provided if the student requires instruction / services during the summer in order to prevent regression that is beyond what a typical student would experience during the break from school. Another possible standard include looking at the nature and severity of the disability, for example considering the fact that a student with autism may need a continuity of structured participation in a classroom setting.

* School districts are applying a more stenuous analysis for the "regression/recoupment" standard. Parents may be faced with IEP teams that say there is "no proof" that the child will regress more than what is typical, or may use indications that the child is meeting IEP goals during the regular school year as indication that ESY is not needed.

* Parents are going to need to come to the IEP meetings armed with information and recommendations to assist them in advocating for ESY. Does your child have an extremely difficult time transitioning to new environments? Argue that this is an indication that the nature of his / her disability requires continuity of services during the summer, and that without ESY the transition to the following school year will cause serious regression. How did your child do after winter break? Previous summer breaks? Use this information as support for ESY this year. Remember that educational benefit is about more than academics, it encompasses "nonacademic" areas like social skills, behavior, etc, and these areas may be good focal points for articulating how your child will regress if not provided appropriate ESY support.

Finally, in general parents should anticipate that this may be happening to their child, and review the IEP document before school gets out. Unfortunately, you may find that the IEP already says your child is not eligible, or the previous IEP may not even speak to ESY. If you need to call another meeting to discuss ESY, now is the time to do it in order to ensure that this issue is brought up before it is too late for this summer.

Fast Fact Friday: When do you have to enroll your child in Kindergarten?

If your child turns 5 years old on or before December 2, then in California, the school district has to accept your child into Kindergarten for that school year. Furthermore, if this applies to your child, then he or she may also be admitted to the prekindergarten summer program maintained by the district for pupils who will be enrolling in kindergarten in September.

However, this does not mean that you have to enroll your child when he or she is 5 years old. The only requirement regarding when you have to enroll your child in school is that each person between the ages of 6 and 18 is subject to "compulsory full-time education" (California Education Code section 48200). Thus, you do not have to enroll your child into school until he or she is six years old (of course, certain exceptions may apply for those parents who choose to home school their child). In fact, there is no requirement that your child has to attend Kindergarten. If a child is determined to be ready for first grade work then, at the discretion of the school administration and with parental consent, the child can be admitted directly to first grade.

So, if you are a parent of a special needs child and a part time preschool program is appropriate to meet the needs of your 5 year old and the typical Kindergarten program is not, then continuing in the preschool program for an additional year should be discussed by the IEP team.

Additional Information:
To learn when an exception can be made that permits your child to enter Kindergarten younger than 5 years old, click here.

For more information on Kindergarten requirements in California, click here.

For more information on the "Kindergarten Readiness Pilot Program," click here.