Adaptive Behavior

The two options for identifying students with disabilities are RTI model and the IQ-Achievement discrepancy model. The RTI model is a multi-tiered approach to identifying students with disabilities. With this approach the amount of students who are identified as having a learning disability has decreased because of the support students receive at different tiers and it eliminates inadequate instruction as the reason for reading problems. Universal screening and high quality teaching is done for all students. Students who show that they need additional help receive tier 1 services where frequency and intensity increases. Students are monitored and receive research based instruction in the general education classroom. Some students may still struggle and have to receive more intensive and frequent service. Those students will receive supplemental support from an educational professional. Tier 3 services are provided to students who still struggle and need even more intensive service. Students may also qualify for special education services. The IQ-Achievement discrepancy model is used to determine if a disability is present. Standardized tests are used to eliminate low intellectual ablity as a determining cause for reading problems. With this model, a professional assess whether there is a discrepancy between a student’s scores on an iq test and scores obtained from areas

According to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (2017), an intellectual disability is classified as a deficit in “intellectual functioning” and “adaptive behaviors.” For a disability to be qualified as an intellectual disability it must have originated before the age of 18. Some diagnoses that fit under intellectual disability include autism, Down Syndrome, Fragile X Syndrome, and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. “Developmental disability” is the umbrella term, encompassing many other disabilities, including those that fall under the category of intellectual disability. Developmental disabilities typically impact an individual in a physical way, such as cerebral palsy or epilepsy.

Cheryl Jorgensen, the work of a scientist-philosopher named Thomas Kuhn in 1962 is referenced regarding disability and competence where Kuhn stated that, “intelligence … can be reliably measured… mental retardation is defined as low levels of intelligence… [these students] … can’t learn much general education content… we aren’t sure that students know, understand, can learn, or have something to say, we presume that they don’t, can’t, and probably never will” (2005, p. 5). Dr. Jorgensen refutes this theory and goes on to support it by citing other works on research suggesting that students with disabilities have shown greater progress when they are challenged with high expectations and good, supportive, nurturing instruction. “Children learn best when they feel valued, when people hold high expectations for them, and when they are taught and supported well” (2005, p.

Prior to 1975, no federal requirements existed for students with disabilities to attend school, or requirements for schools to attempt to teach students with disabilities (Salvia, Yesseldyke, & Bolt, 2013, p. 25). However, upon the enactment of several federal laws, such as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB), student with disabilities received access to free, appropriate public education which in turned required students with disabilities to participate in statewide assessments. According to Public Law 94-142 (now included in IDEA), it requires an individual education program (IEP) for students with disabilities. As part of the IEP, it contains items such as present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, measurable annual goals, criteria of progress, special education and related services as well as documenting any necessary accommodations needed for statewide assessments. The author provides a comparison of statewide assessments including items such as participation, accommodations and types of assessments between the states of Texas and Massachusetts.

The author performed two separate interviews face-to-face, selecting two individuals with different backgrounds in order to obtain unique perspectives. The first interviewee, named Jennifer Hodge, works for Allen ISD as a special education teacher for a self-contained DEAR (Developing Early Academics Readiness) class for students in kindergarten through sixth grade. In addition, her experience includes teaching for 22 years, with seven of those years teaching students with disabilities in both self-contained classrooms along with resource and inclusion environments. The meeting to discuss psychoeducational testing occurred in Jennifer’s work place during her conference period over a 45 minute period on Friday, August 28, 2015. The second

High Stakes Testing has been overly integrated in the education systems. High-stakes testing are used to determine grade retention, school curriculum, and whether or not students will receive a high school diploma (Myers, 2015). Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, high stakes testing has become the norm and mandating that students must pass a standardized test before moving up in grade. As a special education director, the focus is to ensure the student’s accommodations are being followed. Accommodations help increase students’ academic performance. “Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) call for students with disabilities to participate in the general education curriculum and in testing programs to the maximum extent possible for each student (Luke and Schwartz, 2010).” Throughout the years, high stakes testing is becoming more common than ever before. The reality is high stakes testing is one indicator in evaluating children with specific needs. This paper will discuss, the violation of the statutory language regarding assessment based on IDEA, the strategies and goals of a remediation, staff training, common Core and PARCC assessment, and funding for the remediation plan under IDEA.

When learning about Intellectual Disability (ID) it is important to explore the subject with people that work with students of ID. The (SPED) special education team placed together for a student in order to determine the students individual education plan (IEP). This SPED team consist of: Special Educator: Mr. Richard Franklin, General Educator: Ms. Rama Smith (Spelling, Literature), Speech Therapist: Mrs. LuDonna Martin, Principal: Mr. John Denton, Community Organizer and Retired Teacher: Mrs. Nelda Clements and I as the Special

Evaluation: In early 1970, children with learning disabilities were treated much differently than the peers that were at appropriate grade level. In this student’s case, the school system segregated the special needs students placing them in special classroom and labeled them as “slow learners”. With the teachers and school administration lack of knowledge on helping students with disabilities, students were at a disadvantage in receiving a fair education. Children felt as

Diagnostic/Prescriptive/Evaluative (DPE) process is a type of instruction according to Thomas (1996) that helps students with Intellectual Disabilities (ID) accomplish the best chance of success and independence, when accompanied with life goal planning, and goal instructional analysis (GIA), which is a fundamental part of the DPE teaching. The DPE process takes lesson planning, breaks down instruction into manageable segments specialized for the individual student, which provide the necessary educational flexibility to ensure successful outcomes. The first step of this process is to diagnose the student’s skill level along with his/her strengths and weaknesses, and then devise or prescribe a lesson path, where student progress can be

M., & Barton, K. (2003). Assessing Students With Disabilities: Issues and Evidence. Los Angeles: The Regents of the University of California. Retrieved from http://cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/TR587.pdf

In order for a student to be diagnosed for any disability, there is a process that involves many people that are important in the child’s life. The school must conduct tests that measure the child’s academic success in the classroom, as well as tests that measure IQ (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children), work samples, developmental history (usually get this information from the parents), physical exams (vision, hearing etc.), psychological tests, adaptive skills (BASC) and other areas as needed. Testing is usually done by professionals from various disciplines. In order to qualify for special education services under IDEA, the disability must impact the child’s ability to be academically successful (IDEA, 2004).

Intellectual disabilities (ID) in education require proper planning, collaboration, communication, accommodations, modified lessons, and detailed individualized instructions. Intellectual disabilities affect many aspect of a person daily life with a variety of emotional, mental, social, and physical characteristics (Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Foundation, n.d.). Intellectual disabilities are also known as mental retardation (National Institute of Health, 2010). When educating students diagnosed with intellectual disabilities individual education plans (IEP) play a large role in the education process and ensure disabled students are meeting goals, reaching academic

Disproportionate identification of minority students in special education is a major concern in schools today. This paper describes the issues in the assessment process with minority students and how we have arrived at a situation where minorities are being misdiagnosed into special education programs. Additionally, several legal cases are mentioned which show numerous actions and rulings that have tried to correct the disproportionate identification in special education. Some of the legal cases discussed include Larry P. v Riles, Diana v. State Board of Education, and Guadalupe v. Tempe Elementary School, which all significantly impacted special education today. Additionally, the Individual with Disabilities Education Act has enforced

In today’s educational environment, all students expect to receive the same level of instruction from schools and all students must meet the same set of standards. Expectations for students with learning disabilities are the same as students without any learning difficulties. It is now unacceptable for schools or teachers to expect less from one segment of students because they have physical disabilities, learning disabilities, discipline problems, or come from poor backgrounds. Standardize testing has resulted in making every student count as much as their peers and the most positive impact has been seen with the lowest ability students. Schools have developed new approaches to reach these previously underserved students while

According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, students with disabilities should be placed in a “least restrictive environment.” One of the main ideas of this act was to improve the learning experiences of students with disabilities by giving them learning opportunities outside of a special education classroom. The number of students with disabilities being placed in their general education classrooms is increasing more and more each year. The U.S Department of Education’s 27th annual report to Congress on the implementation of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2005) indicates that the number of students with disabilities in general education classrooms has risen to almost 50 percent. This is about a 17 percent increase from the 1997 U.S