Response To Intervention In Special Education

So many federal laws and regulations have paved the way for individuals with disabilities to be able to have the equal opportunity for success. Education was not always an option for everyone, there was a time when receiving an education was a privilege. When writing about IDEA Garguilo states that “we consider this law to be one of the most important pieces, if not the most important piece, of federal legislation ever enacted on behalf of children with special needs” (page 45). This law allowed for all children with disabilities to receive a free appropriate education. IDEA changed the way for these individuals allowing for a: FAPE, LRE, IEP, procedural due process, nondiscriminatory assessment, and parental participation. Students with and

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal law enacted in 1990 and reauthorized in 1997 and 2004. It is designed to protect the rights of students with disabilities by ensuring that everyone receives a free appropriate public education (FAPE), regardless of ability. Furthermore, IDEA strives not only to grant equal access to students with disabilities, but also to provide additional special education services and procedural safeguards.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by schools that receive federal financial assistance. Every year, the school district must identify students with disabilities within their district. Public schools have a responsibility in providing free and appropriate education to students with disabilities in the school district’s regardless of the severity or nature of the disability. Education is intended to ensure the needs of a student with disabilities are met just as the needs of a student without disabilities.

This is the overall process of establishing the services. School districts are required to abide by the established procedures to identify and evaluate students who are showing signs of having a disability. The individual educational plan (IEP) documents the services required to meet the needs of the student. Both laws (ESEA and IDEA) require students with disabilities to participate in statewide assessments with accommodations, where necessary. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a federal law that protects the rights of students with disabilities enrolled in public schools receiving federal funds. Section 504 requires school districts to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to each qualified student with a disability.

Michal is a boy born in Florida who has some special needs. He was born with a brain stem, but not a whole brain. He loves to hear and listen to people talk to him, yet he is morosely incapable of sight, speech, or even understand basic information. He was forced to take an alternate version of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. This year he will be forced to take this test again. He is not alone. This New York times article from February 13, 2014 goes on to give an example of another case. This time it is the story of Andrea Rediske, a Florida parent of a child who is slowly dying from a life burdened by brain damage and cerebral palsy. The state tried to force this child, Ethan, to take this test. In the meantime while Andrea was fighting the school system, Ethan Rediske passed away. It doesn’t have to be this way. Our children aren’t all dying of terrible diseases, but these standardized testing is killing our brothers and sisters creativity and passion for school instead.

Three laws that have shaped and resolved the rights and services available to the students with disabilities will be discussed in this section.Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Individuals with Disabilities Act( IDEA )and The Americans Disabilities Act( ADA). The IDEA is the major federal statute providing educational rights to students with disabilities. Even so, two other statutes, Section 504 of the rehabilitation Act and ADA which was modified recently (ADA,2006,2008), also have implication for the disciplinary process when it involves students with disabilities ( Russo & Osborne, 2009).

The aim of Tier 2 is to catch students’ problems early, provide basic targeted interventions within the general education environment, and prevent long-term negative impact. The goal of a Tier 2 intervention is to support students in meeting grade level benchmarks and catching up to their same aged peers through evidence-based interventions. Examples of Tier 2 interventions are extra reading supports, behavior charts, or home-school notes. After continuous progress monitoring, a problem-solving team may then decide to place a student back into Tier 1, continue Tier 2 interventions, or consider evaluating the student for more intensive Tier 3 services. Ideally, if early intervention is working well at Tiers 1 and 2, only about 5% of children should need services at the intensity of Tier 3. Special education services, such as speech therapy, resource classes, and self-contained classes, are considered Tier 3 services. Tier 3 services typically require students to have an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) because they offer specially designed instruction. MTSS is intended to address both academic and emotional-behavioral difficulties, and this study will address a Tier 1 universal behavior

The author explains that multiple means of data collection must be used to identify students. Additionally, assessments tools used by educators must be reliable and valid. Furthermore, educators need to frequently gather data on students who are considered at risk several times per year in the areas of reading and math. The author further explains that a team of educators should identify evidence-based instructional strategies the general education teacher should apply before making a special education referral for services. Finally, the author states that data should be collected to determine if the student is responding to

Out of Ennis High School’s 345 students class of 2013 graduates, 43 of them were disabled. This means that out of every graduating class, about 12 percent of them are disabled. The disabled students have a graduation rate of over ninety percent, which is two percent higher than the state average for non-disabled. However, Ennis ISD has a tendency to hold back their disabled students, especially in kindergarten, where nearly one-third of them are retained, and first and second grade. These retention rates are way higher than the state averages, but this leads to almost all of them graduating, so this policy must be

Robert Dominguez, Principal of Diamond Valley Middle School explains that a current problem facing DVMS is finding ways to integrate the new AVID policies and procedures into the fabric of our school while maintaining an inclusive environment while working towards our schoolwide vision. Naturally, the DVMS vision and mission aligns well with the AVID mission since DVMS has been working towards becoming an AVID Demonstration School while attempting to maintain our Site of Distinction Status. In addition, we are working on developing more inclusive practices in regard to the placement of our special education students. Mr. Dominguez explains that in an attempt to promote AVID school-wide and allow all students admittance into the program (inclusion versus exclusion) we have inadvertently hurt our chances of obtaining Demo status or maintaining our Site of Distinction. Currently, we have more F's than is considered acceptable by AVID therefore we have to develop a system to identify, track, and drop AVID students fairly and

Special education as we currently know it has been shaped in large part by court cases and subsequent legislation. After the Brown vs. Board of Education case was decided there was a demand for change. During the 1950’s and 1960’s, a group of researchers began to study the current special education system. These efficacy studies were looking specifically for achievement of the intellectually disabled in general education versus separate (or special) education classes. This 1965 research showed that students with intellectual disabilities who were educated in a general education setting, “achieved more academically than those in special classes,” (Goldstein, Moss & Jordan).

There are several methods of delivery for school-based interventions depending on the population that they wish to affect, which can result in varying levels of effectiveness. They can be delivered universally or can be targeted towards students identified as at-risk for particular disorders or problem behaviors (Franklin et al. 2012). In universal interventions, all students participate in the intervention, regardless of their level of risk. For example, Bierman et al. (2010) performed a study on a universal SEL program called Fast Track PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies), which was delivered to all students in the first through the third grade. Teachers received training and continued coaching to integrate SEL into their curriculum

Response to Intervention, or also known as RtI, was created to help detect the presence of a learning disability. The intervention program is a scientific research-based, base on a student’s response. RtI can only help the regular education students that has academic problems or behavior problem. For academic problem there are three tiers to RtI, and of these tiers tier II and tier III each has a four week time period for evaluation. In the first tier the teacher will let the student continue in wholes group instruction, while documenting the action of that student. Base of what was documented doing tier I the intervention will move on to tier two.If a parent request special education testing for their child the teacher immediately start in tier II, no matter if the teacher was in the middle of tier I or have not even thought about doing a RtI for that student.

A special education teacher and mother of three children, one with an intellectual disability of Down syndrome, diagnosed as mild and high functioning, participated in interviews with the author. The interview questions focused on the respondent’s experience and views on psychoeducational testing, which determines a student’s cognitive abilities and academic performance levels that ultimately yields recommendations for instructional planning (Bell, S. M., 2002). In conclusion, the interview includes a reflection of the two interviews through a compare and contrast as well as how the interviewees’ perspective on psychoeducational testing corresponds to the author’s personal and professional roles.

During instructional modification they learned to analyze and decode words also, due to their short term memory, the skills they learnt had to be applied throughout the day, prompting them to remember to use the skills that were previously taught. The inclusion of the RTI process in IDEA 2004 has changes the way learning disability are now determine. In 2004 congress made changes to the Individuals with Disabilities Act implemented an alternative to identifying students with learning disabilities known as RTI. Prior to 2004, a student was labeled with having a learning disability only if a significant discrepancy of 1 ½ standard deviation between their IQ score and academic