School Leader's Guide to Special Education, The. Margaret J. McLaughlin
free appropriate public education includes specially designed instruction in addition to appropriate related services (for example, speech and language services, occupational therapy, technology, and so on) without cost to parents or students. The individualized education program defines what is considered appropriate for each student with a disability. To create an IEP, a team of individuals referred to as the IEP team (which includes the parents, selected school personnel, and, when appropriate, the student) meets to review the student’s evaluation data and determine the appropriate services and instructional strategies that will support the student in the classroom (see chapter 3 for more information about developing an IEP and selecting members for the IEP team).
The IEP is a critically important legal document as well as the foundation for educating a student with a disability. The process for developing the IEP and who should be involved in developing the IEP are carefully prescribed in law as part of the guarantee of FAPE. The IEP represents a contract between the school system and the student’s parents or guardians. We will discuss this important document in more detail in chapter 3.
What is considered FAPE for any given child is to be determined by the IEP team. However, defining what is considered appropriate has been subjected to a number of legal decisions. The U.S. Supreme Court case Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) ruled that schools are responsible for providing an individualized education to students eligible under the law. However, the court also stated that the law did not intend appropriate to mean maximizing the fullest potential of each child with a disability. The court further defined FAPE as an education that is delivered in compliance with the student’s individualized education program and is “reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefits” (Board of Education v. Rowley, 1982).
Additional guidance on implementing IDEA’s statutes and regulations is provided at http://idea.ed.gov by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) and the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) within the U.S. Department of Education.
Least Restrictive Environment
IDEA also requires that students with disabilities be educated in the least restrictive environment and with their nondisabled peers “to the maximum extent appropriate” (Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 2009). The 1997 and 2004 amendments to IDEA emphasize that IEP teams must first consider providing special education in the general education classroom and may only consider other settings if the student cannot receive an appropriate education even with special supports and services. For most students, the general education classroom is the appropriate setting. However, some children may require other settings, and the IDEA regulations require that school districts must be able to provide instruction in the following settings: general classrooms, special classrooms, special schools, home, and hospitals and institutions.
Where a child is educated is based on multiple factors such as academic achievement, progress in the general education curriculum, and teacher and parent input, and it is the responsibility of the IEP team to evaluate all the data and document why a student might receive special education outside the general classroom. According to OSEP’s 29th Annual Report to Congress, during the 2004–2005 school year, 96 percent of students ages six through twenty-one served under Part B of IDEA were educated in general education classes for at least some part of the school day. More than half of all students ages six through twenty-one served under Part B of IDEA were educated for 80 percent or more of the school day in general education classes (U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 2007).
Under IDEA, more restrictive placements can be considered appropriate when the safety of the student with a disability or of the other students in the school environment is threatened or when the student with a disability is so disruptive that the education of the other students is significantly impaired. In these instances, documentation of the student’s behaviors to support the more restrictive placement is essential. Exactly what documentation might be required will depend on your local district’s policies, but most likely the IEP will require that the team indicate why it has decided to remove a student from the general education classroom. For instance, the statement might include evidence about specific behaviors such as vocal outbursts or aggression that may require a smaller, more controlled environment for learning to occur. These decisions are to be reconsidered at least once a year, and there should be evidence in the IEP that the interventions and supports that the student might require have been attempted in a general classroom.
Related Services
Under IDEA 2004, related services are defined as services that enable an individual student with a disability to benefit from special education. They are different from special education, which is specially designed instruction. IDEA includes the following items in its definition of related services an individual student may need to benefit from special education:
• Transportation
• Speech and language services
• Physical therapy
• Occupational therapy
• Interpreting services
• Audiology services
• Psychological services
• School health services
• Technology
• Recreation
This list is not exhaustive. However, IDEA does exempt surgically implanted devices and medical services unless those services can be provided by a trained layperson, including a teacher, school nurse, paraprofessional, or similarly trained individual. Related services are determined by the IEP team and specified on the IEP document.
Procedural Protections for Parents and Students
To protect the rights of students with disabilities and ensure their parents or guardians are meaningfully included in all decisions related to the student’s special education program, IDEA provides procedural due process requirements. These are formal procedures and processes that the school must follow and are usually referred to as procedural safeguards or sometimes as parents’ rights. They are intended to protect against school decision making that may prevent a student with a disability from obtaining a free appropriate public education. IDEA sets the basic requirements, but each state—and often districts—must develop their own policies and procedures that may be more restrictive than the federal requirements. It is essential for principals to have a firm understanding of their state and district procedural safeguards to ensure that the school is upholding the rights of the students in their building and those students’ parents. They must be sure to follow the specific procedures and timelines set by their districts pertaining to such things as parent notices, required signatures, and so on. These procedures, which may be regarded as burdensome paperwork, are actually legal entitlements guaranteed under the law. The district special education administrator should ensure that each principal has a document that states these policies and procedures in his or her school and should ensure that it is available to parents as needed. This individual is the key contact in matters pertaining to special education and should be consulted in case of any doubt about a procedure.
Under the procedural safeguards in IDEA, parents are entitled to the following due process rights:
• Written prior notice of any actions related to their child and special education
• Written material provided in the parents’ native language unless it is clearly not feasible to do so
• Opportunity to examine all records relating to their child, including identification evaluation, placement, IEP development, disciplinary notices, progress reports, and reports from service providers
• Right to obtain an independent educational evaluation of their child
•