Special Education and Related Services

 

From the information already available, Bryanna has been identified as a qualified candidate for Tier 3 interventions in special education. His follows the results of the previous tests which have shown than she is not qualified for SLD/LD designation despite her discrepancies and deficits in speech and language. She therefore does not have a learning disability but some weaknesses in reading and responding which will still require support in her education.

Identification of Special Education Needs

From the assessment, the school has identified that Bryanna requires special education and related services. The parents were consulted and allowed to present their views in regard to the education system. According to the parents, they are ready to support the child in every aspect that the teachers would recommend.

Evaluation of the Need

As a second step after the identification of need, the child is evaluated using a disability in education checklist. The evaluation done on Bryanna is as shown in the table below.

Table 1. Evaluation of the Need in the Child

Evaluation question Answer
Does the child have a disability that require special education and related services? Yes
What are the Child’s educational needs? She has deficits in speech-language as well as in reading.
What special education services are required or appropriate to address the needs? Speech-language. Tier 3 special education services.

 

These results were used to make decisions on the eligibility of the child for special education and related services. Bryanna’s parents agreed with the evaluation results and this allowed the teachers to progress with the special education process.

Decision for Eligibility

To ensure that the evaluation results for Bryanna are valid and that she is eligible for Tier 3 special education and related services, the parents decided to consult professional evaluators who check the results of the teachers’ evaluation. From the experts’ reviews, Bryanna is found to be eligible for the services and labelled ‘child with a disability’ as defined by IDEA. No challenge of the decision was required.

After the eligibility is ascertained, the child was found qualified for special education and related services and from then, the school started planning for Bryanna’s specialised program under Individualised education program (IEP) (Sanches-Ferreira, Lopes-dos-Santos, Alves, Santos, & Silveira-Maia, 2013).

IEP is developed with the purpose of ensuring that reasonable and specific learning goals for the child are set and to ensure that the capability of the school to provide the necessary services is ascertained (Idol, 2006). The IEP contains information on the child’s specific needs, present educational level and performance, goals of the special education services, lessons to be provided and their timings as well as how services will be modified and how the school personnel will evaluate the progress for each of the children towards their goals of education (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Stecker, 2010).

 

 

The IEP Development and Implementation

For Bryanna, an IEP meeting was planned. Two weeks to the meeting, the special education department in the school sent a letter to the parents of Bryanna explaining the purpose of the IEP meeting and the expected experts. The meeting was attended by Bryanna and her parents, Bryanna’s three teachers in tier 1 and tier 2, special education representatives from the school and experts in especial education and IEP from the ministry of education.

The meeting was held 30 days form the day the results of eligibility test were received and approved. In this meeting, the participants reviewed the assessment information provided by the school concerning Bryanna. With the expert’s help, the team developed an educational program to ensure that all the identified educational needs are met by the program.

Table 2. IEP Evaluation Report

Goal #     1   

Area of Need

Reading Compreh

Baseline Person(s)

Responsible

1st Review

Date

2nd Review

Date

3rd Review

Date

Annual Review

Date

Expected Outcome:  

 

 

 

Progress Code:_____ Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Was Goal met?

Yes  No

Summary:

Goal #     2   

Area of Need

Written Language

Baseline Person(s)

Responsible

1st Review

Date     12/02

2nd Review

Date     06/03

3rd Review

Date     N/A

Annual Review

Date

Expected Outcome:    

 

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments

Progress Code:_____

Was Goal met?

Yes  No

Summary:

Goal #     3   

Area of Need   Math

Baseline Person(s)

Responsible

1st Review

Date     12/02

2nd Review

Date     06/03

3rd Review

Date     N/A

Annual Review

Date

Expected Outcome:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Progress sufficient to meet annual goal?

Yes  No

Comments:

Progress Code:_____

Was Goal met?

Yes  No

Summary:

 

The group also participated in the decision for the placement of Bryanna. This meant that from that point, the child is considered a fully prepared recipient of special education and the related services. The parents were the taken through the expected programs for the services and gave consent for the school district to proceed with the services.

After only one week after the preparation of the IEP, Bryanna started to receive the services prescribed under Tier 3 of the special education and the related services. A copy of the IEP was provided to the parents and the experts. In addition, the parents were advised to attend a biweekly monitoring meetings with the educators in order to track the progress of the child under the program.

 

 

Progress Measurement, Reporting and Evaluation

Throughout the process the teachers reviewed Bryanna’s progress through the IEP and filled the IEP progress report. The results of this report were shared with the parents and the best method to stay on course and meet the goals and objectives of the program. Periodic evaluation is to be conducted as indicated on the report template and annual review will be done at the end of the year. Re-evaluation is expected to be conducted after three years of the program to check if Bryanna remains in the ‘child with a disability’ bracket (Rakap, 2015).

Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100
Use the following coupon code :
SKYSAVE