Students are supposed to be determined eligible for special education services under the law.

Full Answer Section

• Individualized Education Program (IEP) Development (if eligible): If the student is found eligible for special education services, an IEP team, including the parents, develops an individualized education program (IEP). The IEP outlines the student's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, measurable annual goals, the specific special education and related services the student will receive, and the accommodations and modifications necessary for the student to make progress in the general education curriculum.
• Placement: The IEP team determines the most appropriate educational placement for the student, ensuring that the student is educated in the least restrictive environment (LRE) to the maximum extent appropriate for their individual needs.
• Review and Reevaluation: The IEP is reviewed at least annually, and the student is reevaluated at least every three years (or more frequently if needed) to determine if the student continues to be eligible for special education services and if the IEP remains appropriate.

3. Identify two common problems that arise during the process of referral, evaluation, and identification. Give specific examples from the texts and your experience to clarify and illustrate your claims.

Two common problems that frequently arise during the special education eligibility process are:

• Bias and Subjectivity in Referral and Evaluation: The initial referral and subsequent evaluation can be influenced by implicit biases and subjective interpretations of student behavior and academic performance.

  • Example from Experience: In my observations, I've seen instances where students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are disproportionately referred for special education evaluations based on perceived behavioral issues that might be better understood within their cultural context. For instance, a student who is less verbally expressive in class due to language barriers might be misconstrued as having a learning disability or social-emotional difficulties, leading to an unnecessary referral. Similarly, teachers' preconceived notions about certain students or groups of students could unconsciously influence their observations and the types of behaviors they deem problematic enough for referral.
  • Example from Texts: Educational literature often discusses the issue of disproportionality in special education, where students from certain racial and ethnic minority groups are overrepresented in specific disability categories, such as emotional disturbance or learning disabilities. This suggests that systemic biases within the referral and evaluation processes may be contributing to these disparities. For example, a teacher might interpret a student's non-standard English dialect as a sign of a language-based learning disability without adequately considering the student's proficiency in their home language or the cultural norms of communication.

• Insufficient or Inadequate Evaluation: The quality and comprehensiveness of the evaluation can vary significantly, sometimes failing to capture the full spectrum of a student's needs or accurately identify the presence and nature of a disability.

  • Example from Experience: I've encountered situations where evaluations relied heavily on standardized academic tests without sufficient consideration of qualitative data, such as classroom observations, teacher input on specific learning challenges, or parent reports on the student's functioning in other environments. For example, a student with a specific learning disability in writing might perform within the average range on a broad reading comprehension test, leading to an underestimation of their significant difficulties in expressing themselves in written form. This narrow evaluation wouldn't provide the detailed information needed to develop targeted interventions.
  • Example from Texts: Research on the evaluation process often highlights the limitations of relying solely on quantitative measures and the importance of incorporating multiple sources of data. Some texts discuss the challenges of accurately identifying students with complex learning profiles or those whose disabilities manifest differently across settings. For instance, a student with high-functioning autism might demonstrate strong cognitive abilities on standardized tests but struggle significantly with social communication and executive functioning in the classroom, aspects that might be missed if the evaluation doesn't include thorough behavioral observations and functional assessments.

4. Offer at least one concrete, specific suggestion to teachers for addressing or mitigating this problem.

One concrete, specific suggestion for teachers to address or mitigate the problem of bias and subjectivity in the referral process is to implement a structured, evidence-based pre-referral intervention system that emphasizes systematic data collection on specific academic and behavioral concerns over time, coupled with collaborative problem-solving with colleagues and specialists before initiating a formal special education referral.

This system would involve:

• Clearly defined, observable indicators of concern: Instead of vague feelings or general impressions, teachers would be trained to identify and document specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) indicators of academic or behavioral difficulties. For example, instead of "Johnny is disruptive," the teacher would document "Johnny gets out of his seat without permission an average of three times per math lesson for the past two weeks."
• Tiered interventions: Before referral, teachers would implement increasingly intensive, research-based interventions within the general education classroom to address the identified concerns. The effectiveness of these interventions would be systematically documented using data collection methods like frequency counts, duration recordings, or work sample analysis.
• Collaborative problem-solving teams: Teachers would regularly meet with a pre-referral team consisting of other teachers, instructional coaches, school psychologists, and potentially special education staff to discuss the documented concerns and the outcomes of the implemented interventions. This collaborative approach can help to consider different perspectives, brainstorm alternative strategies, and ensure that instructional or environmental factors are adequately addressed before considering a special education evaluation.
• Data-driven decision-making: The decision to refer a student for a special education evaluation would be based on the documented lack of significant progress despite the implementation of targeted, evidence-based interventions over a reasonable period. This data-driven approach reduces the reliance on subjective interpretations and provides a more objective basis for suspecting a potential disability.

By implementing such a structured pre-referral system, teachers can ensure that interventions are systematically tried and their effectiveness is documented before a student is formally referred for special education. This can help to differentiate between students who need targeted general education support and those who may genuinely require the specialized services of special education, thereby mitigating the influence of bias and subjectivity in the initial referral stages.

Sample Answer

Briefly describe the process by which students are supposed to be determined eligible for special education services under the law.

The process for determining a student's eligibility for special education services, as mandated by laws like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in the United States, typically involves the following key steps:

• Referral: A student may be referred for a special education evaluation by parents, teachers, school administrators, or other concerned individuals if there are concerns about the student's academic, behavioral, or developmental progress. This referral often stems from observations of the student's difficulties in the general education classroom.
• Evaluation: Once a referral is made, the school is legally obligated to conduct a comprehensive and individualized evaluation of the student. This evaluation must be non-discriminatory and utilize a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information about the student, including information provided by the parents. Parental consent is required before the evaluation can proceed.
• Eligibility Determination: A team, including parents and qualified professionals (e.g., teachers, school psychologists, special education staff), reviews the evaluation results. The team determines if the student has a disability, as defined under the law, and if, by reason thereof, the student needs special education and related services. The disability must adversely affect the student's educational performance.