Скачать книгу

and decision making surrounding mediation to ensure that parents’ concerns are addressed in a timely fashion. If the parent(s) agree to the process of mediation, a mediation conference must be scheduled within fifteen calendar days of receiving the due process complaint, and a resolution that the parents and school agree to must be signed within thirty days of receiving the due process complaint.

      Parents and school districts have the right to request an expedited due process hearing when the dispute results from a disciplinary action and concerns a student’s placement or determination of manifestation. Either the parent or the school district can file the expedited due process complaint and request. Regardless of who brings the complaint, the school system is responsible for scheduling the due process hearing and ensuring that all expedited timelines are met. Once the expedited due process complaint is received, the school is responsible for convening a resolution meeting within seven days unless the parents and the school agree to waive the resolution meeting. If the dispute cannot be resolved in the resolution meeting, the expedited hearing must occur within twenty school days of the request, and an administrative law judge must issue a decision within ten school days after the hearing. Although the timeline is considerably shortened, IDEA mandates that the expedited hearing maintain the same requirements as stipulated for general due process hearings such as a right to counsel and presentation of evidence with the opportunity to cross examine. IDEA does give states the authority to develop and implement alternate timelines and rules for expedited due process complaints and hearings. Therefore, it is important to ensure that you are familiar with your state procedures as well as the requirements specified in IDEA. Generally, state guidelines can be located on your state’s education website.

      In addition to IDEA, there are specific requirements pertaining to students with disabilities in the No Child Left Behind Act. Together, NCLB and IDEA define how students with disabilities are to be assessed and how schools will be held accountable for their performance and educational improvement. NCLB also specifies that all students, including those with disabilities, are to access and be held accountable for achieving the same grade-level content standards as all other students in the building. The expectation that students with disabilities should be fully included in grade-level state standards is designed to eliminate some historical problems in special education, including lower expectations for student learning, isolated IEP goals, and special education instruction focused primarily on low-level skills (McLaughlin, 2009).

      Both IDEA and NCLB policies require that all students with disabilities are included in statewide assessments and that their progress in achievement not only be reported as a separate subgroup but also be included in the schoolwide calculations. While IDEA and NCLB both demand that all students with disabilities be included in statewide assessments, the laws still recognize the importance of individualization, a cornerstone in special education, by providing several ways for students with disabilities to participate in the statewide assessments. A student’s IEP is expected to reflect grade-level content standards, but certain students may be assessed against different achievement standards. There are five ways that a student with a disability may be assessed: (1) regular assessment without an accommodation, (2) regular assessment with accommodations, (3) alternate assessment based on grade-level achievement standards, (4) alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards, and (5) alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards (see chapter 4 for more detailed information about accommodations and modifications of assessments).

      Alternate achievement standards only apply to students with significant cognitive disabilities and are defined as “an expectation of performance that differs in complexity from a grade-level achievement standard” (U.S. Department of Education, 2005, p. 20). In addition to alternate achievement standards, states have the option of developing modified achievement standards for students whose disabilities are so severe that they are unable to achieve grade-level proficiency or progress in the same time frame as other students (McLaughlin, 2010). Only a very few states have developed modified achievement standards, and it is unlikely that these standards will be continued when NCLB is reauthorized. As of this writing, draft legislation for this reauthorization has been released.

      Visit http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/states/index.html for more information on NCLB and students with disabilities.

      Another provision in both NCLB and IDEA refers to highly qualified special education teachers. Under IDEA 2004, a highly qualified special education teacher is defined as someone holding full state certification and meeting the same requirements as general educators if he or she teaches core academic subject matter (such as English, reading or language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, art, or history and geography) at middle and high school levels. Teachers of students held to alternate achievement standards in middle and high school should be certified or qualified in “subject matter knowledge appropriate to the level of instruction being provided” (“Q and A,” 2007).

      These requirements have implications for where and from whom a student with a disability receives his or her instruction. Middle or secondary students with disabilities must receive instruction in the previously mentioned content areas from teachers—special or general education—who are considered qualified by their state to teach that content. The “generic” special education teacher cannot be the primary instructor in these areas. It can be very difficult to find a teacher who is qualified in certain content areas such as algebra, geometry, or the physical sciences and in teaching students with disabilities. This requirement has led to increased use of co-teaching and collaborative models (which we discuss in chapter 4) that enable teachers to share expertise and collectively determine how best to deliver the content to every student.

       Defining a Highly Qualified Special Education Teacher

      In general, to be considered a highly qualified special education teacher, IDEA requires the following (Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 2010b):

      • Full state certification or licensure as a special education teacher

      • No waiving of certification or licensure requirements on an emergency, temporary, or provisional basis

      • A minimum of a bachelor’s degree

      However, there are different requirements for special education teachers who teach core academic subjects, alternative achievement standards, and multiple subjects. Please visit http://nichcy.org/schools-administrators/hqt for more information about the federal requirements for highly qualified special education teachers. For a list of additional resources that contain information on staff development and qualified personnel, see the section on qualified personnel in appendix A (page 68).

      Visit go.solution-tree.com/specialneeds for links to the websites mentioned in this book.

      In addition to IDEA, two civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of an individual’s disability include (1) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and (2) the Americans With Disabilities Act. Any student with a documented disability is covered under Section 504, but not all of these students are eligible under IDEA.

      Section 504 protects both children and adults with disabilities from discrimination in institutions receiving federal funds. Under Section 504, administrators, teachers, school psychologists, and other school personnel are

Скачать книгу