Plan Of Action And Curriculum For Creating Student Led Iep Meetings

One of the two requirements from indicator 13 that is missing is the teacher did not inviting Lisette to her own IEP meeting. The teacher mentioned that the reason for not inviting Lisette was because she knew basketball practice. Regardless, indicatory 7 states that the students must be invited to their own IEP meeting where transition plans will be talked about. Their must be proof that an attempt was made to invite the student to attend the IEP transition meeting. If I was the facilitator of the meeting I would try to make an arrangement that worked with everyone schedule involved and also Lisettes. Having the student involved at the IEP transition planning is important, because there are discussions about her future and plans

In the video, it discusses the main purpose the to discuss the student behavior. I also notice that they included a parking lot for when the meeting gets out of topic we can write down in the parking lot and address them at a later the end of the meeting. Also, the team must discuss the main goals to create strategies to help with the student educational goals. In the video, it discusses the student overall progress and behavior and set out goals was to create strategies to improve student behavior at school. In addition, reviewing to IEP checklist I believe the difficult part is not getting off the topic. They will be parents that are unhappy or don’t agree with the results that can cause tension and frustration. The purpose of the meeting is to collaborate and coming into agreement strategies to improve on the child goals. It will be difficult to stick with the agenda when the parent has other topics to address instead of the goals that are presented. Facilitated IEP are beneficial with complex IEP meeting issues especially when knowing beforehand situations have been complex. A facilitator supports the general IEP team that is conducting a IEP meeting. The team members run the meeting while the facilitator main purpose is to intervene and upholds the peace, while assisting the team to focus on the real issues and goals in

In my district, in order to ensure the accommodations are being implemented according to IEP deadlines, special education staff frequently monitor our classroom activities, as well as meet with the teachers and request they complete a progress report on each student with an IEP. Our responses will show if we are not applying or interpreting the accommodations correctly or if there are ineffective accommodations. For example, in Joseph’s situation, if one of the accommodations is that teachers are to provide preferred seating in the classroom, but it is not affecting his focus, the team might need to reconvene to modify the IEP accommodation to small group work. Regardless of the reason, having teachers complete a progress report provides documentation that is essential to the IEP process. This fact is supported by Lombardi and Ludlow; “general education teachers are expected to be prepared to modify the scope and sequence of their curriculum when needed” and “when either the teacher or parent feels the program is not meeting the student’s needs, it is important for both parties to have documentation to support their positions” (2004, p. 14-15). Lastly, because the mother felt there was a serious lack of communication between her and the school, a regular report should be given to her, using her preferred form of

During the meeting, several issues are address such as concerns, activities, questions and changes in IEP goals. Student’s placement in a special education program is decided by the IEP team after parents or facilitator gives the ok for the students to begin receiving services that they are in desperate need of. Some decision that at made at the meeting are not always done with all parties in agreement with what needs to change. Some parents don’t agree with some of the services that will be provided to their child but, will need more time to think about the services and need the reason why some decisions where consider for their child, but never receive it. Some parents never agree and do not give their written consent for the services their child has received. When this issue is not resolved parents have the option to ask for mediation and a hearing but because of the backlog with the meeting process they feel that the meeting will not take place and their voice will never be heard. Parents know that in order to participate in their child’s IEP, teachers and the IEP team must know the students disability. Several Parents complain that some of the parties at the meeting do not know who their child is so how recommendations for services’ can made. Parents send principals letters demanding answers to their

Scenario 3: During the course of an annual individualized education program (IEP) meeting, Ms. Dougherty, a first-year teacher, perceives that a school district administrator is trying to “steer” the parents of a student with emotional disabilities into accepting a revised IEP without the provision of school-based applied behavior analysis services recommended by the majority of other team members. Ms. Dougherty hypothesizes that the administrator’s position is based on the added costs the financially strapped school district would bear if it provided these services. As a first-year teacher, Ms. Dougherty is concerned that if she speaks up, she might lose the favor of her principal and maybe her job. If she remains silent, the student might not receive needed services.

For this assignment, I observed an IEP meeting for a three year old boy. The child is a three year old Hispanic boy, and his native language is Spanish. The child was receiving speech services through Early Intervention.

On Monday, September 25th, I was invited to sit in as the general education teacher in an IEP team meeting. The meeting was held for a student with down syndrome, identified at birth, who qualified for services under the category of intellectually disabled. This student is in a self-contained classroom, therefore, his current teacher, served as the special education teacher for the purposes of this meeting. Meeting participants included: Mrs. Fields (ARC Advocate), Dr. Neiman (Main speech therapist, participated over the phone), Mrs. Bennett (LEA representative), Mrs. Diggs (ACS EC Director, as a precaution because the parents expressed concerns for the education of their child), Mrs. Sikes (General Education Teacher), Mrs. Bernard

Productive and successful IEP meetings require careful preparation on the part of all stakeholders. Guardians who arrive at their kids IEP meeting without have not have not done their assignment risk beforehand end up leaving the room without a full understanding of what they agreed to. In order to participate fully and confidently in the IEP meeting, guardians must be informed about the process, know details well, and in possession of all the information needed to make the best decisions regarding their kid. We must keep in mind that the focus is on the kid's needs, not the district's resources or the guardian's expectations.

Overall, I felt that all the individuals involved in the meeting did collaborate fairly well with each other. The meeting was organized, calm, and everyone was able to express their thoughts. However, there were some instances in which I believe that collaboration may have been hindered. The first example occurred in the beginning of the IEP meeting. The special education teacher asked the parents what their concerns were for the son. The parents stated that he is falling behind in doing his assignments as the written component is very difficult for him. The special education teacher and the general education teacher did not

Next the webinar described the steps taken by the school district to ensure participation in the IEP meeting. The individual components of the IEP were described. Finally Extended School Year (ESY) and the reevaluation process was described in the webinar.

Thomas is a high school student who has been suspended for getting upset in class, yelling at other students, and cursing at teachers and other staff members. Thomas is on an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) for and emotional disability. During the IEP process, Thomas’s team created a Behavior Improvement Plan (BIP) using the results from a Functional Behavioral Analysis (FBA). As the year progressed, Thomas’s cumulative days of suspension reached ten days and he therefore needed a manifestation determination meeting to determine if his behaviors were because of his identified disability.

On September 18, 2017, I received the opportunity to observe a triennial IEP meeting for B.T., a 13-year old male who attended the 8th grade at Northern California Preparatory, a non-public school. The IEP meeting consisted of a few key members such as the program specialist, a representative-special education teacher, school psychologist, B.T. and his parent, their advocate, and another member of the school. The reason for this meeting was to reevaluate the student’s special education placement and if B.T. could transfer back to a public school.

In the first lecture that outlined the IEP rules and regulations I was surprised to learn about three things. The first was that all IEPs must be in effect by the beginning of the school year and should happen immediately following an IEP being written. As an administrator, I would start each year by reviewing the IEPs and ensuring that my intervention specialists review the IEPs with general education teachers. I would also want to check with general education teachers and intervention specialists periodically to ensure that special education services were being followed and goals were being met within the classroom. This would help to stop any potential lawsuits from arising and would make sure the law was being followed. The next thing that I did not realize was that throughout the IEP content that there was a section entitled “present levels of performance” that uses parent friendly language. The parental language is really crucial to zoom in on as an administrator because it helps solidify a relationship with the parent and also secures that parents truly understand what is happening with their child. If I were an administrator then I would make sure my intervention specialists were writing all IEPs in language that any person could understand for this reason. Lastly, I did not realize that when evaluating the progress of an IEP that one must use research-based data as documentation. I was under the impression that observation and teacher input could be used

When collaborating on IEPs, my employer uses a web based program to assist in the improvement of IEP teams. The web based program allows access to it from any computer with internet (home or work). The ability to access the IEP document from anywhere increases the efficiency by not limiting where the document can be edited. In addition to easy access, the online program allows multiple people to edit the document. This technology allows the IEP to be update as the student progress through different goals or for the annual IEP review. The case manager of the IEP does not need to guess if a service provider has completed their section. They can simply review the document for the last update.

The first project I completed was Project A, which I only observed one IEP meeting that was both an annual and a domain meeting. I attended this meeting on February 22, 2017 for about two hours. IEP team members included: student’s mother, father, grandmother, Mrs. Phipps, school nurse, school psych intern, social worker, and myself. Each person in the meeting signed on form stating who was in attendance during the meeting. From my own previous experience, I have attended a few of my IEP meetings, and I did relate my experience attending my own IEP meeting to attending Student E’s IEP meeting. All the members in the IEP team, especially Mrs. Phipps demonstrated IPTS 9, “The competent teacher is an ethical and reflective practitioner who exhibits professionalism; provides leadership in the learning community; and advocates for students, parents or guardians, and the profession” (IPTS 9). Before I went to the IEP meeting, I could not help but think about my past experiences of my IEP meetings, and I wondered how I can learn to separate my experience to Student E’s IEP, but being in a different perspective, I learned there is more value in communicating and working with others. Every member in the IEP team asserted and expressed their opinions and concerns about the student; thus, they will move