May 2015 – Special Educator e-Journal

Table of Contents

• Update from the U.S. Department of Education

• Literature Review — Experiences of Parents of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) when Dealing with Schools Regarding their Children’s Education – – Sheila Bravo, Florida International University

• Parent Involvement and Advocacy in Special Education – – Kristin Rodriguez, Florida International University

• Buzz from the Hub

• Legislative Announcements, Calls to Participate and New Projects

• Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET

• Upcoming Conferences and Events

• Funding Forecast and Award Opportunities

• 
  

  Acknowledgements

• 
  

  Download a PDF or XPS Version of This Issue

Update from the U.S. Department of Education

New Report Shows Greater Need for Access to High-Quality Preschool for America’s Children

The U.S. Department of Education released a new report today detailing the unmet need across the country for high-quality preschool programs.

According to the report, A Matter of Equity: Preschool in America,of the approximately 4 million 4-year olds in the United States, about 60 percent – or nearly 2.5 million – are not enrolled in publicly funded preschool programs, including state preschool programs, Head Start and programs serving children with disabilities. Even fewer are enrolled in the highest-quality programs.

The report highlights the need for an Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that expands access to high-quality early learning opportunities and makes the law preschool through 12th grade, rather than K-12. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan discussed the report today during a visit to Martin Luther King Jr. Early Childhood Center in Phoenix, Arizona.

“This new report shows that we are a long way from achieving full educational opportunity in this country. Students have made enormous progress in recent years, thanks to the hard work of educators, families and the students themselves, but we have so much farther to go, and making high-quality preschool available to all families who want it must be part of that,” Duncan said. “We’ve made key investments in early learning, but we need to do more. Expanding access to high-quality preschool within the reauthorization of ESEA will narrow achievement gaps, and reflect the real, scientific understanding that learning begins long before a child enters kindergarten.”

Advances in science and research have proven the important impact that preschool programs can have on children’s learning, but unfortunately too many children still do not have access to these programs. Latinos are the United States’ fastest growing and largest minority group, making up a quarter of 3- and 4-year-olds, yet they have the lowest preschool participation rates of any major ethnicity or race – 40 percent as compared to 50 percent for African-American children, and 53 percent for white children. In addition, children from low-income families are less likely to be enrolled in preschool than their peers – 41 percent compared to 61 percent. African-American children and children from low-income families are the most likely to be in low-quality settings and the least likely to be in high-quality settings. All children need access to high-quality preschool to prepare them for kindergarten and to close the opportunity and achievement gaps

For some children when they enter kindergarten, huge educational gaps exist. White students have higher reading and math scores than students of color. Scores on reading and math were lowest for kindergartners in households with incomes below the federal poverty level and highest for those in households with incomes at or above 200 percent of the federal poverty level. Children at risk for academic failure, on average, start kindergarten 12 to 14 months behind their peers in pre-literacy and language skills. Without access to quality preschool, students of color, and children from low-income families, are far less likely to be prepared to start kindergarten than their peers.

High-quality preschool provides benefits to society of $8.60 for every $1 spent, according to the White House Council of Economic Advisors December 2014 report, The Economics of Early Childhood Investments, about half of which comes from increased earnings for children when they grow up. An impressive coalition of education, business, law enforcement, retired military, child advocacy groups, and faith-based leaders and 70 percent of voters said in a recent Gallup poll that they would support increasing federal funding to make sure high-quality preschool programs are available for every child in America.

The Obama Administration has made significant investments in early learning through the Early Learning Challenge and thePreschool Development Grants programs. The grants lay the groundwork for states to be prepared for the proposed Preschool for All program. The Administration has asked for an increase of $500 million for Preschool Development Grants in the FY16 budget request to expand this opportunity to more states, the Bureau of Indian Education, tribal educational agencies, territories, and the outlying areas.

Preschool Development Grants support states’ efforts to build or enhance their infrastructure to provide high-quality preschool programs, and expand programs in high-need communities. The $250 million awarded to 18 states will benefit more than 33,000 additional children in 200 high-need communities, where families have little or no access to affordable, high-quality preschool. With additional funding, the Department could have provided high-quality opportunities for many more children in the 36 states that applied.

New Guidance from U.S. Department of Education Reminds Schools of Obligation to Designate Title IX Coordinator

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights today released a guidance package emphasizing the responsibility of school districts, colleges and universities to designate a Title IX coordinator. The package also contains an overview of the law’s requirements in several key areas, including athletics, single-sex education, sex-based harassment, and discipline.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in all education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance.

“A critical responsibility for schools under Title IX is to designate a well-qualified, well-trained Title IX coordinator and to give that coordinator the authority and support necessary to do the job,” said Catherine E. Lhamon, assistant secretary for civil rights. “We hope that these documents will help schools understand their obligations under Title IX.”

The guidance package released today includes three documents:

• A Dear Colleague Letter to school districts, colleges, and universities reminding them of their obligation to designate a Title IX coordinator.
• A letter to Title IX coordinators that provides them more information about their important role.
• A Title IX resource guide that includes an overview of Title IX’s requirements in several key areas, including recruitment, admissions and counseling; financial assistance; athletics; sex-based harassment; treatment of pregnant and parenting students; and discipline—all topics that frequently confront schools and their Title IX coordinators.

Since the issuance of Title IX regulations in 1975, school districts, colleges, and universities receiving federal financial assistance from the Department of Education have been required to designate at least one employee to coordinate the recipient’s compliance with Title IX.

OCR’s mission is to ensure equal access to education and promote educational excellence throughout the nation through the vigorous enforcement of civil rights. The office is responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination by educational institutions on the basis of disability, race, color, national origin, sex, and age, as well as the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act of 2001. For more about the office, click here.

Statement from U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on Senate HELP Committee’s Markup of the No Child Left Behind Act

I applaud the leadership of Chairman Alexander, Senator Murray and the members of the HELP Committee on the important steps taken this week to advance a bipartisan proposal to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It is long past time to replace No Child Left Behind with a law that ensures continued progress and opportunity for America’s children. The bill now honors the widespread bipartisan call to expand access to high quality preschool. The bill also makes a critical investment in innovation and scaling what works. However, to live up to ESEA’s legacy of advancing equity and providing opportunity for every child, we join with numerous civil rights and business groups in urging that further significant improvements be made to the bill to create the law that America’s children deserve. Every family and every community deserve to know that schools are helping all children succeed – including low-income students, racial and ethnic minorities, students with disabilities and students learning English. And they deserve to know that if students in those groups fall behind, their schools will take steps to improve, with the strongest action in the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools. In addition, we should ensure that educators have the resources they need, and that federal dollars reach the most vulnerable students they are intended to support. I am encouraged that this week, members of the HELP Committee recognized the need to strengthen the bill’s accountability measures as this legislation advances in the Senate. I look forward to continuing to work with Congress on that effort.

Secretary Duncan Announces Education Department’s First-Ever Guide for Ed Tech Developers

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan today announced the first-ever guide for developers, startups and entrepreneurs from the department’s Office of Educational Technology (OET).

The Ed Tech Developer’s Guide: A Primer for Developers, Startups and Entrepreneurs is a free guide that addresses key questions about the education ecosystem and highlights critical needs and opportunities to develop digital tools and apps for learning.  Written with input from knowledgeable educators, developers, and researchers who were willing to share what they have learned, the guide is designed to help entrepreneurs apply technology in smart ways to solve persistent problems in education.

“Technology makes it possible for us to create a different dynamic between a teacher and a classroom full of students. It can open up limitless new ways to engage kids, support teachers and bring parents into the learning process,” Duncan said, addressing theASU+GSV Summit 2015 in Scottsdale. “We need tools designed to help students discover who they are and what they care about, and tools that create portals to a larger world that, in the past, would have remained out of reach for far too many students.”

Richard Culatta, director of educational technology, added, “The demand for high-quality educational apps is increasing as communities become more connected, devices become more affordable, and teachers and parents are looking for new ways to use technology to engage students.  Yet, many existing solutions don’t address the most urgent needs in education. Opportunities abound for software designers and developers to create impactful tools for teachers, school leaders, students, and their families.”

Education tools are needed to improve mastery of academic skills, foster and measure non-cognitive skills, embed formative assessments, engage families, support college and career exploration, provide job-embedded professional development, improve educator productivity, increase access for all students and close achievement gaps.

“All students have the right to an equitable education,” Culatta said. “This right should not be affected by geographic location, family income, or any other demographic factor. Ed tech tools have the potential to close the opportunity gap by providing access to rich educational experiences not available in all communities, for example, virtual labs and field trips, advanced coursework, access to field experts, and opportunities to interact with students around the world.”

The guide also stresses the importance for developers and entrepreneurs to work with educators at every stage of development to make the best possible educational tools and apps.

To top

The present literature review will explore the importance of collaborative relationships between schools and parents. It will focus on specific reasons for parental dissatisfaction with school systems found in the existing literature in the United States and abroad. It will depict common difficulties in building productive relationships with parents. To add the voice and perspectives of the population being explored, interviews with two parents will also be included.

Parental Involvement

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurological condition characterized by impairments in communication, social interaction and repetitive and/or stereotyped behaviors. The growth of autism in the population has been steady and some consider it an epidemic, with the latest incidence in the United States being 1 in every 68 children identified as having an ASD by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network (ADDM, 2014). Given the documented growth in diagnosed cases of ASD, it is recommended that school systems be prepared to provide quality services for students with autism by being able to meet their specific educational needs.

An important variable in students’ success is parental involvement. Parent-teacher collaboration should be ongoing to produce positive results. To guarantee parental participation in the development of educational plans for their children, legislation has being drawn such as Public Law (P.L.) 94-142 (Education for All handicapped Children Act, 1975) that mandates parental participation on Individual Educational Programs (IEP) meetings to help design educational services for students receiving special education services. It is important to note that legislation alone is not enough to ensure parental participation and it becomes pertinent to focus on the experiences that parents have when dealing with the school systems. Disability advocacy can be an overwhelming experience for parents and may prevent them from fully participating in their children’s education. Yet, parents of students with ASD tend to become very involved in their children’s education, becoming very knowledgeable and acting as advocates for their children’s rights.

According to Tucker and Schwartz (2013), who reviewed the results of an internet survey of 135 parents regarding their perceptions on collaboration and conflict between school personnel and parents, the parents participating in this survey considered they were highly involved in their children’s educational progress. As documented,   this was facilitated by their school districts and resulting from taking their input into consideration and communicating and planning regularly with them regarding their children’s education.

Zablotzky, Boswell, and Smith (2012), reviewed a national sample of parents from the 2007 Parent and Family Involvement in Education survey, conducted by the US Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics, 2006-2007, and found that parents of students with ASD tend to be more involved with their children’s education.

Specifically, parents of children with ASD were more likely to participate in conferences with the teachers, attend meetings with school counselors, and help their children with their homework, IEP goals, among others.

Consistent with these studies, both parents interviewed were very involved in their children’s education, participating in IEP meetings, helping with homework, communicating with teachers and other school staff, and any other opportunities to do so.

Reasons for Parental Dissatisfaction

Within the context of disability status, there are several reasons for parental dissatisfaction with school systems. One of the reasons cited by parents is a lack of understanding of the specificities of ASD that seems to be lacking among teachers and other school personnel. Montes, Halterman, and Magyar (2009) reviewed the results of the 2005-06 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care needs, which included 40256 parents of children with disabilities between 0-17 and compared access to, and satisfaction with school and community health resources between parents of children with ASD and other disabilities.  They found that one of the problems that parents complained about relates to lack of appropriate teacher training regarding the teaching of children with ASD. Additionally, Montes et al. also reported parents’ dissatisfaction in the area of providing additional services when requested and documented in the IEP.

A study by White (2013) focused on the complaints filed by parents of students with ASD in the Midwestern US. Specifically, 97 electronic summaries of complaints filed between 2004 and 2009 were reviewed. Similarly to what Montes et al. (2009) found, White also reported that a common complaint among parents was lack of staff qualifications. Along this vein, Tucker and Schwartz, et.al (2013), found that parents had mixed opinions regarding the level of knowledge of school staff regarding their child’s disability.

Sciutto, Richwine, Mentrikoski and Niedzwiecki (2012) conducted a study with 97 participants (students and parents) and found that most participants considered the understanding of Asperger syndrome (AS) that teachers and other school personnel have an area where further training is needed.

In contrast to what the studies discussed portrayed, in the two sample interviews conducted, it was found that the parents interviewed did not have concerns regarding staff qualifications or knowledge about ASD. One of the parents considers that, because autism is a spectrum and children with ASD are very different from one another, it is the parents’ job to inform school staff of their child’s interests, likes, and dislikes to make sure that his/her needs are being met.

Another reason for parental dissatisfaction found in several studies addresses parental input and participation in IEP meetings, as well as communication with school staff.

Tucker and Schwartz, et.al, indicated that parents participating in their survey pointed out that educators not always valued their participation as equal members of the IEP team. Input and communication between parents and school professionals were noted as sources of conflict by parents. Parents and professionals frequently disagreed about IEP content such as goals, services provided, instruction, discipline, and placement.

Zablosky, et.al., found that parents of students with ASD are most unsatisfied with the level of communication with their children’s schools regarding placement in a classroom and/or group. The authors also found a positive correlation between parental involvement with school activities and their satisfaction with the school. This positive correlation between involvement and satisfaction was also seen in the interviews conducted with both parents who are overall satisfied with their children’s education and are very involved in their children’s schools.

White, et.al, found that one third of the complaints filled by parents were related to their participation not being taken into consideration by the schools, citing lack of parental input and participation in the education process, as well as a break-down in communication between them and the schools.

Despite the legal nature of the documents addressing educational services for individuals with disabilities, some of the complaints purport schools failing to provide Procedural safeguards, written notifications, copies of IEPs, adequate notices about meetings, amongst others. Parents also complained about not having been provided with the appropriate consent forms addressing change of placement and evaluations.

Starr and Foy (2012) surveyed 144 parents of children with ASD and found that the parents surveyed in their studied noted the lack of collaboration and communication as a major source of dissatisfaction.

Once again at odds with the studies depicted, the parents interviewed for this literature review, feel that their input is taken into consideration most of the time. One of them said that sometimes he does not agree with the frequency of additional services, such as speech therapy, considering that it should be more frequent; but that the school does not have the resources to provide those services as frequently as he would like. The other parent considers that her input is taken into consideration because she has become an advocate for her child and is very knowledgeable; otherwise, the school system would provide her son with the minimum services.

Another documented area of dissatisfaction reported by parents of students with ASD, relates to transition between early intervention services and school services. According to Montes, et.al., parents complained that transition between early intervention services and school is very difficult because the first one is family centered and the second one is centered on education. Early intervention targets problems related to the disability that affect the family as a whole, such as sleep problems, feeding, among others. Whereas school systems tend to only focus on education, Montes et al. investigated access to community and school health care services and compared the levels of satisfaction with those services between parents of students with ASD and parents of children with other special health care needs. The study found that parents of children with ASD were 3 times more likely to encounter difficulties accessing community and health care services for their children than parents of children with other needs. Among the problems reported to access services were lack of qualified staff to attend their children’s needs and services, as well as communication and information difficulties that impeded them to access services. Both of which seem to confirm the findings discussed earlier by Montes, et.al., 2009;  Sciutto, et.al., 2012;  White, 2013;  and Tucker, et.al.,

The parents interviewed did not express any problems in their children’s transition to school.

Other areas of dissatisfaction for parents were behavior and discipline. White, et.al, found that 24 % of the complaints filed dealt with behavior management techniques applied by schools and the related disciplinary actions. Parents complained that Functional Behavior Assessments (FBA) or Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs) had not been established or, that when BIPs were in place, the steps outlined in the plans had not being followed. It is pertinent to note that Sciutto, et.al, found that behaviors of students with ASD are sometimes misunderstood by school staff, thus suggesting the need for further teacher training. Starr, et.al, found that the parents whose children had been suspended thought that the main reason for the suspensions was the school staff’s inability to deal with the child’s behavior. The children of the parents interviewed have not experienced any behavioral difficulties.

An area of general dissatisfaction found throughout the literature targeted the students’ IEPs. The difficulties in this area may arise from differences in the composition of the IEP and also from difficulties with the implementation of the goals, services and accommodations. White, et.al, found that some of the issues regarding IEPs are related to goals not being measurable, IEPs not specifying service provision details, such as duration of services, frequency, among others. Also, parents complained about accommodations, services and support systems not being available and implemented in a timely manner and as documented in the IEP. One of the parents interviewed said that services and accommodations are provided as written because she makes sure that this happens and that teachers are aware of accommodations and services, frequency of services, among others. The other parent had no complaints in this area.

The dissatisfaction with school systems regarding the teaching of students with ASD seems to transcend frontiers among countries and is found in literature from different parts of the world. As evidence, Brown, Ouellette-Kuntz, Hunter, Kelley and Cobigo (2012) conducted a cross-sectional survey of 101 Canadian parents of school-aged children diagnosed with ASD and found that parents regularly reported that their children have unmet needs regarding social activities, information about services and continuous service provisions.

In line with the international trends documented, another study by Keenan, Dillerburger, Doherty, Byme, and Gallagher (2009) explored the issue of diagnosis and forward planning for children with ASD in Ireland. The study found that parents felt that their views were not taken into consideration when developing their children’s educational plans, especially if the views differed from the ones expressed by professionals. In agreement with this study, one of the parents interviewed had difficulties when his child was first placed in a classroom and expressed a similar view about the IEP team not listening to their opinions, but the situation was rectified in a later meeting. The other mother interviewed also had difficulties when her child started receiving educational services and had to insist to receive the services that she considered were necessary. She strongly believes that her son receives the services necessary because she is a strong advocate for his rights; otherwise, the school system would not provide the necessary services to meet his needs.

In a study by Tissot (2011) that examined the perceptions of parents and local authorities regarding obtaining appropriate educational placement for children with ASD, parents reported that they found the process of placement to be stressful, bureaucratic and lengthy.  The authors concluded that communication between parents and local authority personnel has to be improved. Contrary to this study, the parents interviewed did not express difficulties obtaining an appropriate placement for their children or having difficulties communicating with the school.

After reviewing the literature about experiences and perceptions of parents of students with ASD some commonalities have been found. One of them is the fact that parents of students with ASD tend to be very involved in their children’s education, which was also found in the interviews. Among the areas that create dissatisfaction in parents are the lack of staff qualifications and knowledge about ASD; insufficient importance given to parental input and participation on IEP meetings and inadequacy of the level of communication; difficulties with transitions between early intervention services and school services; and finally, problems with behavior management and discipline. At odds with these findings, the parents interviewed did not have complaints in relationship to any of these areas and, although they considered that some areas can be improved and more services should be provided, they were overall satisfied with their children’s education.

Nevertheless, it is important that schools review complaints that parents may have in order to establish more productive relationships and collaborations that will ideally benefit students with ASD.

References

Brown, H., Ouellette-Kuntz, H., Hunter, D., Kelley, E. & Cobigo, V. (2012). Unmet needs of families of school-aged children with an Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 25, 497-508

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2014). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 Years. Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network. Vol. 63 No 2

Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. U.S. Public Law 94-142. U.S. Code. Vol. 20, secs. 1401 et seq.

Keenan, M., Dillenburger, K., Doherty, A., Byme, T. & Gallagher, S. (2009). The experiences of parents during diagnosis and forward planning for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 23, 390–397

Montes, G., Halterman, J.S., & Magyar, C.I. (2009). Access to and satisfaction with school and community health services for US children with ASD, Pediatrics, 124; S407, DOI:  10.1542/peds.2009-1255L

Sciutto, M., Richwine, S., Mentrikoski, J. & Niedzwiecki, K. (2012). A qualitative analysis of school experiences of students with Asperger syndrome, Focus on Autism and Other developmental Disabilities, 27(3), 177– 188. DOI: 10.1177/1088357612450511

Starr, E.M. & Foy, J.B. (2012). In parents’ voices: The education of children with autism spectrum disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 33(4) 207-216, DOI:  10.1177/0741932510383161

Tissot, C. (2011) Working together? Parent and local authority views on the process of obtaining appropriate educational provision for children with autism spectrum disorders. Educational Research, 53(1), 1-15, DOI: 10.1080/00131881.2011.552228

Tucker, V. & Schwartz, I. (2013). Parents’ perspectives of collaboration with school professionals: Barriers and facilitators to successful partnerships in planning for students with ASD. School Mental Health, 5, 3-14. DOI: 0.1007/s12310-012-9102-0

Wade W. Fish (2008). The IEP meeting: Perceptions of parents of students who receive special education services.  Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 53(1), 8-14, DOI: 10.3200/PSFL.53.1.8-14

White, S. (2013). Special education complaints filed by parents of students with autism spectrum disorders in the Midwestern United States. Focus on Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 29(2), 80– 87. DOI: 10.1177/1088357613478830

Zablotzky, B., Boswell, K. & Smith, C. (2012). An evaluation of school improvement and satisfaction of parents of children with autism spectrum disorders, American Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 117(4), 316–330   DOI: 10.1352/1944-7558-117.4.316

Abstract

This is a literature review discussing the topic of parent involvement and parent advocacy in the area of special education.  Parent involvement and advocacy in special education is an important topic and needs to be further researched in order to help parents better understand how to become advocates and ensure their involvement in their child’s education.  This literature review discusses six articles that are related to parent involvement in special education and special education advocacy.  During this review it was found that although parent collaboration is required by law through IDEA parents are not always included in the decision making process for their child’s education especially when it comes to families of diverse cultures.  Parents need to ensure that they are included in the decision making process and that they make their voices heard during meetings.

Literature Review

There is some research on parent involvement and a student’s education and on parent advocacy for students with disabilities.  Research has shown that parent participation does have an impact on a student’s success in school.  Parent involvement and advocacy for students with disabilities is an important factor to help ensure the student’s success and that they are receiving the services and accommodations necessary and required to help them demonstrate their full capabilities.  This literature review is going to discuss some of the research on parent involvement specifically related to the area of exceptional student education and parent advocacy for students with disabilities.

Parent Involvement

Parent involvement has a big impact on a student’s success in school and the quality of their education especially when it comes to students with disabilities.  Chen and Gregory (2010) researched parent involvement during the Prereferral Intervention Team Process (PIT Process).  They did an anonymous records review and choose 88 PIT cases from 14 out of 16 elementary schools from 2005-2006 school year.  They looked over the records with a six person research team and measured parent involvement in two ways.  They looked at whether or not the parent attended the PIT meetings and if they implemented the interventions.  The results indicated that “parents were present at both the initial and first follow-up meeting in 43% of the cases, and they were present at one of the two meeting in another 43%” (Chen & Gregory, 2010, P.452).  The results also showed that “In the remaining 14% of the cases, parents did not attend either meeting.  Parents were actively involved in implementing PIT interventions in 44% of the cases” (Chen & Gregory, 2010, P.452).  A correlation was found between parents who attended the meetings being more likely to implement interventions versus parents who did not attend the meetings.

One study surveyed parents of children with autism on their satisfaction of the education of their child.  Starr and Foy (2010) surveyed 168 parents who volunteered for the study and had children with autism.

Out of the 168 parents who were surveyed 91% returned the surveys and 144 of the returned surveys were included in the study.  The survey focused on five main topics: school suspensions, attitudes of others toward the child, satisfaction or dissatisfaction with education, what parents feel their children need, and ultimate goals for the child.  The results for school suspension indicated that “a total of 15.4% (n=22) of children in the sample had been suspended at some point in their school career.  All parents whose children had been suspended believed that the reason behind the suspension was the inability of the school staff to deal with the child’s behavior” (Starr & Foy, 2010, P.210).  Research found that some of the parents were told to take their children home due to behavior concerns.  In regards to attitudes of others toward the child many of the parents had specified feeling prejudice, fear and even resentment from other parents and members of the school staff.

Starr & Foy (2010) research found the following:

Numerous other categories of perceived fear and resentment were mentioned by the parents and included (a) issues related to their child’s behavior and the assumption that behavior difficulties are all discipline related (e.g., “Teachers accusing me of ‘not warning them,’ complaining that my daughter should have ‘grown out of this by now’ . . . [and a] comment from [a senior kindergarten] teacher—She needs a good spanking.”), (b) lack of understanding and ignorance of the disability (e.g., “I do not feel teachers know what to do with her—they don’t know how to modify so she sits and does nothing or colours”), and (c) fear of the child on the part of school personnel or other parents (e.g., “Parents were afraid my son would pinch or bite their child, also the teachers were afraid of that and for themselves too. (P.211)

When it came to parent satisfaction with the child’s education the results found that parents with younger children were more satisfied then parents with children who were in fourth grade or higher.  The results indicated that, “a major source of dissatisfaction was the fact that many parents felt the education system was not meeting the needs of their children” (Starr & Foy, 2010, P.211).  The parents also felt dissatisfied by the seeming lack of awareness about ASD by the staff and administration at the school.

Another related study looked at how parents may obtain advocates to help them affirm their rights and how advocates can be trained.  Burke (2013) researched parental involvement, the barriers to parental involvement, and two models for training special education advocates.  In the research it was found despite the IDEA requiring parental involvement and collaboration that parental involvement is still lower when it comes to special education in comparison to head start and other programs.  Some of the barriers to parent involvement were the parents not feeling like they had equal say in their child’s education and IEP meetings and the ineffectiveness of the procedural safeguard.  This article researched two models for training special education advocates, The Special Education Advocacy Training (The SEAT) and The Volunteer Advocacy Project (The VAP).  The SEAT project used a formal curriculum to train their advocates and the participants had to meet six competencies and in 115 hours of classroom instruction and 115 hours practicum experience over 4 months.  There were face to face classes and coursework over the 4 months and an instructional team of a special education advocate, parent to parent support professional, and a special education lawyer.

Burke (2013) research found the following:

Participants gained experience in the following area: knowing how to find information, grasping and discriminating between federal and state law, using analytical skills, understanding unauthorized practice of law, negotiation between parties, communicating orally and in writing, identifying issues, addressing parent concerns, and acting in a professional manner. (P. 229)

The SEAT participants consisted of three different cohorts of totaling 144 people.  According to the study, “trainees could not be convicted felons, law students, practicing attorneys, school or state educational agency employees, or school board member. The majority (80%) of the participants were parents of children receiving special education services” (Burke, 2013, P. 229).  The VAP however, was a voluntary program that only required participants to complete two competencies and did not consist of any face to face classes and coursework.  The VAP had five different cohorts totaling 129 participants and there were no exclusion criteria for the participants.  According to the article, “59.1% of participants were parents of children receiving special education services” (Burke, 2013, P. 230).  Some of the most important issues that still need to be researched is documenting the need for a special education advocate, and figuring out the best way to train advocates.

Advocacy

Parents being advocates for their children with disabilities are important.  Parents need to become empowered to fight for what their children need and should be getting according to their IEP or 504 plans.  Allen (2013) discusses here experience being a professional advocate for ESE students and parents and being a parent of a child with a disability at the same time.  Some of the points that were stated for other parents who might be in a similar situation was to make being mom the first job and make sure that you remember you do not always know everything.  She also spoke about trusting the therapists to do their job and support the therapist but not to try to do their job for them.  Allen (2013) indicated that all environments come with their challenges and no environment is perfect.  As stated in the article, “My child does not need to be “fixed.” She is beautiful and capable in her own way and I must support her in reaching her fullest potential” (Allen, 2013, P. 202).

Another related article used focus groups to get the parent’s perspective on special education and inclusion practices.  Hess, Molina, and Kozleski (2006) conducted focus groups with parent of students with disabilities to find out what roles they played in the decision making of their child’s education and what their feelings on the special education service models were.  They used 27 parents of children with disabilities and the children’s disabilities ranged from emotional disorders, learning disabilities and cognitive disabilities.  The participants were identified by school psychologists from eight elementary schools in the district.  They intentionally choose parents of diverse cultural, ethnic, and linguistic backgrounds.

Hess, Molina, and Kozleski (2006) study found the following:

for parents, a dichotomy emerged between passive compliance with educational decisions and learning to become an advocate for one’s child. The next theme concerned teachers and their dual role as an expert and as the family’s main support system with the school.  Finally, the organization and climate of schools and the ways that they address the needs of families were presented. (P. 151)

The goal of this study was to clarify the issues voiced by the parents in the focus groups and they found that regardless of cultural, ethic, or linguistic background a lot of the parents shared the same concerns.  The most important thing learned from this study is the need to teach parents how to be advocates for their own children and empower them to take action when it comes to decision making for their child’s education.  The families need to be given the necessary information and told where they can find the information child’s educational rights and options and they need to become equal partners in the process and feel like they actually are equal partners.

One article looked at the equity and advocacy expectations for involvement in special education for culturally diverse families.  Kalyanpur, Harry, and Skrtic (2000) researched the barriers of collaboration and implications for professional education when it comes to parent involvement in special education of culturally diverse families.  Some of the issues indicated were the lack of effort on behalf of the school personnel to obtain parent input when it comes to decision making, not scheduling the meetings at times that are accommodating to the parent’s schedule, and sending home information that is not in the home language or in easy terms for non-education professionals to be able to easily understand.  Although IDEA entitles parents to collaborate with professionals it is also implied that it is up to the parent to ensure they are made a part of the decision making process for their child.  Parents from culturally diverse families may not realize that they need to take action to make themselves part of the team and ensure their collaboration.

Kalyanpur, Harry, and Skrtic (2000) state the following:

The values of equity, individual rights, and freedom of choice imbedded in the legal requirement for parent participations.  These imbedded values contribute to two expectations for parents in the decision making process: the expectations of equity and advocacy.  The equity expectation assumes that parents will be considered partners with professionals in ensuring an appropriate education for their child with disabilities, while the advocacy expectation assumes that parents will choose to participate in the decision making process, make their service preferences know, and seek redress if these requests are not responded to.  However the equity expectation conflicts with the hierarchy of professional knowledge and status that is a product of the positivist paradigm, while the advocacy expectation makes the assumption that all families subscribe to the values of individual rights and freedom of choice. (P. 122)

Despite the legal efforts to create parent professional collaboration it is still difficult to achieve because the professional knowledge is still given more weight since in is scientifically based and seen as objective while the parents’ knowledge of their own children are seen as subjective.  When it comes to parents from culturally diverse backgrounds or low socio-economic backgrounds the parent professional collaboration becomes even more difficult to achieve because the child’s culture or background could be seen as a fault.

As Kalyanpur, Harry, and Skrtic (2000) stated:

Professionals implementing the special education mandate for parent participation are operating with in a cultural context often without an awareness of its imbedded values or the barriers that might impede collaborations with families from low socio-economic and culturally diverse backgrounds.  This situation indicates the need for professional education to incorporate approaches that would allow professionals to recognize the cultural underpinnings of their practice towards a more effective and balanced advocacy. (P. 130)

Conclusion

Parent participation and involvement in their child’s education is paramount; especially for parents of students with disabilities becoming involved and becoming empowered to take action and ensure that you are an equal participate in their education and decision making can make a big difference in their future success in school.  Parents need to be shown how to become advocates and where they can access the information need about their child’s rights and how to get what they need.  Professionals also need to ensure they are helping parents become equal participants and advocates for their children.  Parent’s knowledge about their own children should not be considered objective just because it is not scientifically based.   Professional assessments cannot always tell you all there is to know about a child even though they are scientifically based.  More research needs to be done on how to help parents become involved and become advocates for their children; especially when it comes to parents from low socio-economic and culturally diverse backgrounds.  These parents need to know what to do and how to take action and ensure they are active participants in their child’s education.

References

Allen, A. E. (2013). Family connections: When the personal parent-professional partnership is in your

own head. Childhood Education, 89(3), 202. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1509084275?accountid=10901

Burke, M. (2013). Improving Parental Involvement: Training Special Education Advocates.

Journal of Disability Policy Studies,23(4), 225-234. Retrieved November 16, 2014, from http://dps.sagepub.com/content/23/4/225

Chen, W., & Gregory, A. (2010). Parental Involvement In The Prereferral Process: Implications

For Schools. Remedial and Special Education,33(6), 447-457. Retrieved November 22, 2014, from http://rse.sagepub.com/content/32/6/447

Hess, R. S., Molina, A. M., & Kozleski, E. B. (2006). Until somebody hears me: Parent voice

and advocacy in special educational decision making. British Journal of Special Education, 33(3), 148-157. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/62111092?accountid=10901

Kalyanpur, M., Harry, B., & Skrtic, T. (2000). Equity and Advocacy Expectations of Culturally

Diverse Families’ OParticipation in Special Education. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education,47(2), 119-136.

Starr, E., & Foy, J. (2010). In Parents’ Voices: The Education of Children With Autism

Spectrum Disorders. Remedial and Special Education,33(4), 207-216. Retrieved November 01, 2014, from http://rse.sagepub.com/content/33/4/207

To access everything below in this section from Buzz from the Hub, visit:

http://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/buzz-march2015/

New Resources in the Hub

What’s new in the resource library? Here’s 1 newbie (on IEPs) and a reminder about 2 recent newborns.

Guidelines for working with interpreters.
In this document you’ll find tips on working with a bilingual interpreter, including what to do before, during, and after an interpreted event. Could certainly be useful at many, many IEP meetings…

Access to and examination of records | Training module.
Last week we “buzzed” you about the final training module published in NICHCY’s Building the Legacy for Our Youngest Children with Disabilities–Module 12. The module looks at parents’ right to the confidentiality of personally identifiable information in their child’s early intervention records, as well as their right to inspect and review those records. The module includes a slideshow presentation, trainer’s guide, and handouts for participants. Happy training!

Did you miss the webinar on Self-Advocacy Skill Building?
No problem! The archive of last week’s webinar on helping youth with disabilities become effective self-advocates is now posted at the Hub, so you can catch all the details (especially Josie Badger’s presentation!), view the slideshow, and download the handout.

______________________

Spotlight on … IEP Resources

Parent Center staff and the families you serve have to be quite knowledgeable about IEPs—-what IDEA requires IEPs to include, what type of questions to ask in IEP meetings, how a student’s disability may affect the type of information that’s put into his or her IEP. Use the resources below to refresh your memory, train new staff, and connect families with information relevant to their situation.

The short and sweet IEP overview.
This quick summary comes from NICHCY, introduces IEP basics, and connects readers to the increasingly more detailed information that’s available in the All About the IEP suite. Available in Spanish as well.

Don’t forget about the “special factors” to be considered by the IEP team.
IDEA lists five special factors that IEP teams need to consider and how any of these can affect student learning and, thus, what’s included in the IEP. Those special factors are: behavior, limited English proficiency, blindness or visual impairment, the communication needs of students who are deaf or hard of hearing, and assistive technology.

Placement in the regular classroom | Providing necessary supports.
A student’s placement may be decided during the IEP meeting. IDEA clearly states that students with disabilities are supposed to be educated in regular education classrooms alongside their peers without disabilities to the maximum extent appropriate. So how is placement decided? What resources are available to support students with disabilities in the regular classroom?

Read Considering LRE in Placement Decisions

Have a look at Supports, Modifications, and Accommodations for Students

Also consider Supplementary Aids and Services

Make sure the student’s workbooks and materials are accessible.
The AEM Center focuses on the importance of accessible educational materials (AEM) for students with print disabilities. Check out the Center’s resources on the subject and share these with the families you serve.

New brief| This brief explores components of the IEP where it might be appropriate to refer to a student’s need for and use of AEM.

Webinars | AEM has lots of great videos, all archived at the Center and thoroughly exploring the subject of AEM in the IEP.
_________________________________________________

Resources You Can Share with Families: Writing or Updating the IEP

This section of the newsletter identifies useful IEP resources that you might share with families or mention in your own news bulletins.

Developing your child’s IEP: A parent guide in English and Spanish.
This detailed guide for parents covers what’s required in an IEP, who develops the document, what to expect at an IEP meeting, tips for parents, and what to do if you don’t agree with some aspect of the draft IEP. From NICHCY and vetted by OSEP. Also available in Spanish.

IEP meeting checklist for parents.
From SPAN of New Jersey, this checklist provides an outline of how to prepare for and what to expect at the IEP meeting.

Students on the IEP team.
Students themselves have vital information to share at IEP meetings. The IEP is about them, after all, about their education and their life. Students have the right to attend the meeting where their IEP is developed and must be invited when they’re 16. So get those students involved!

_________________________________________________________

Resources Just for Parent Centers

This section of the CPIR’s newsletter focuses on the many priority areas that Parent Centers have, with a special emphasis on the 14 topics that OSEP has identified as important for Parent Centers and the CPIR to address.

This month, we are again focusing on effective educational practices for improving student outcomes. These resources may also be relevant in your state’s work on the SSIP in 2015, so keep them in mind for the future.

The 5 stages of implementation.
The National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) reviewed more than 2,000 articles on the implementation of programs and identified five main stages of successful implementation. Here’s a quick read.

Implementation quick start.
This 5-minute presentation provides a quick overview of implementation science and the NIRN’s Active Implementation Frameworks.

How to use implementation science to improve outcomes for children.
This article outlines how the science of implementation and the use of evidence-based Active Implementation Frameworks can close the research-to-practice gap in early childhood and ensure sustainable program success.

The deep well of info at the Active Implementation Hub.
The Active Implementation Hub is a free, online learning environment for use by any stakeholder involved in active implementation and scaling up of programs and innovations. The site goal is to increase the knowledge and improve the performance of persons engaged in actively implementing any program or practice.

Legislative Announcements, Calls to Participate

and New Projects

States Moving Forward On ABLE Accounts
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2015/03/13/states-moving-forward-able/20131/
The recent federal Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act provides a way for people with disabilities to save without risking their government benefits, and now most states are working to make the new accounts available. The ABLE Act, signed late in 2014 by President Barack Obama, lets people with disabilities open special accounts where they can save up to $100,000 without jeopardizing eligibility for Social Security and other government programs. Before the accounts can become available, however, states must put regulations in place. To date, lawmakers in more than half of states have taken steps to create the new savings vehicles, advocates say.

2016 Learning Disabilities Association of America Conference Call for Proposals
http://ldaamerica.org/
The 2016 Learning Disabilities Association of America Conference will be held in Orlando, Florida, February 15-18, 2016, and the conference is seeking submissions. Anyone wishing to present a paper, conduct a workshop, provide an informational session, or make a formal presentation is invited to submit a proposal. Deadline for submissions is May 15, 2015.

Autism Speaks Putting New Focus on Adults
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2015/02/03/autism-speaks-focus-adults/20019/
After prioritizing the needs of children for years, Autism Speaks, the nation’s largest autism advocacy organization is turning its attention to expanding housing options and supports for adults. Starting as a pilot project in three states, Florida, New Jersey and Illinois, Autism Speaks is working with locally-based disability advocacy groups and policymakers to identify legislative goals and mobilize its own network to push for expanded home and community-based services.

Obama Calls for Boost to Disability Programs
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2015/02/03/obama-budget-disability/20023/
President Barack Obama wants Congress to halt planned cuts under sequestration and increase funding for special education and other programs for people with disabilities. The proposals come in Obama’s $4 trillion budget plan which was released 02/16/15. The budget highlights the president’s priorities for the government’s 2016 fiscal year starting Oct. 1. Included in the plan is an added $175 million in funding for special education services for school-age children with disabilities and $115 million for programs for young kids served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Feedback to OSEP on Proposed Approach for Including Results Data in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C Determinations Process
http://tinyurl.com/m9e8hwx
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) sought feedback on a proposed approach for including results data in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C determinations process. At the request of OSEP, the Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (ECTA) developed a proposal for using results-driven data for an accountability framework to review states’ performance results for children who receive early intervention services. The feedback received has been posted on OSERS’ blog.

U.S. Education Department Reaches Agreement with Youngstown State University to Ensure Equal Access to its Websites for Individuals with Disabilities
http://tinyurl.com/meg6omu
The U.S. Department of Education announced in December that its Office for Civil Rights has entered into an agreement with Youngstown State University in Ohio to ensure that the school’s websites comply with federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Youngstown State’s websites were not readily accessible to persons with disabilities, and the university was not fully in compliance with the regulatory requirements regarding the publication of a notice of nondiscrimination in relevant documents.

The agreement ends an OCR investigation and commits the 13,000-student public institution in northeast Ohio to providing equal access to educational opportunities for students with disabilities and to ensuring that the school’s websites are accessible to persons with disabilities, including students, prospective students, employees and visitors.

U.S. Department of Education Announces 2014 National Blue Ribbon Schools 337 Schools Honored–287 public and 50 private
http://tinyurl.com/mcawtsl
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has announced the recognition of 337 schools – 287 public and 50 private– as National Blue Ribbon Schools for 2014 for their overall academic excellence or their progress in closing achievement gaps among student subgroups. These schools demonstrate that all students can achieve to high levels. The award affirms the hard work of students, educators, families and communities in creating safe and welcoming schools where students master challenging content. The Department invites National Blue Ribbon School nominations from the top education official in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Department of Defense Education Activity and the Bureau of Indian Education. The Council for American Private Education (CAPE) nominates private schools.

Disability Visibility Project
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2014/06/16/storycorps-disability/19443/
“DisabilityScoop” reported June 16, 2014, in an article, “StoryCorps Looks To Record Disability Experience,” that a new project, the Disability Visibility Project, has been launched as a community partnership with StoryCorps, a national nonprofit that allows everyday people to record casual, one-on-one conversations in an effort to preserve history. As the 25th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act approaches next year, this project will encourage people within the disability community to share their stories. StoryCorps’ recording booth in San Francisco is making sessions available between July 10 and Dec. 13 specifically for members of the disability community to record their stories. Additional times are expected to be added leading up to the ADA’s 25th anniversary in July 2015.

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2014/07/10/congress-sheltered-eligibility/19500/
“DisabilityScoop” reported July 10, 2014, in an article, “Congress Passes Bill Limiting Sheltered Workshop Eligibility,” that a bill that would significantly limit young people with disabilities from entering sheltered workshop programs is headed to President Barack Obama’s desk. The U.S. House of Representatives voted to approve the “Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.” Included in the bill are changes to the path from school to work for those with disabilities. The measure would prohibit individuals age 24 and younger from working jobs that pay less than the federal minimum of $7.25 per hour unless they first try vocational rehabilitation services, among other requirements. It would also require state vocational rehabilitation agencies to work with schools to provide “pre-employment transition services” to all students with disabilities and require such agencies to allocate a minimum of 15% of their federal funding to help individuals with disabilities in transition under the measure.

U.S. Department of Education’s Guidance Letter on Charter Schools’ Legal Obligations to Individuals With Disabilities
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2014/05/15/feds-warn-charters-special/19368/
The U.S. Department of Education issued a guidance letter in May 2014 outlining charter schools’ legal obligations to individuals with disabilities, regardless of whether the schools receive federal funding. Included in the letter are reminders that students with disabilities cannot be discriminated against in admissions and disciplinary actions; and that parents with disabilities must be accommodated, e.g., with sign-language interpreters or Braille materials, when communicating with the school.

Disability.gov PSAs Challenge Assumptions about People with Disabilities
https://www.disability.gov/newsroom/psa-download-center/
Disability.gov recently released public service announcements (PSAs) in support of the message that people are not defined by their disabilities. Each of the eight PSAs features one of Disability.gov’s “No Boundaries” participants. Each PSAs participant chose several words to describe him or herself to paint a broader picture of who they are. The PSAs are downloadable from the Disability.gov site.

Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET

To top

Funding Forecast and Award Opportunities

Forecast of Funding Opportunities under the Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs for Fiscal Year 2015
http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/find/edlite-forecast.html
This document lists virtually all programs and competitions under which the U.S. Department of Education has invited or expects to invite applications for new awards for fiscal year 2015 and provides actual or estimated deadlines for the transmittal of applications under these programs. The lists are in the form of charts organized according to the Department’s principal program offices and include programs and competitions previously announced as well as those to be announced at a later date.

FY 2015 Discretionary Grant Application Packages
http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html
This site, from the Department of Education, provides information on grant competitions that are currently open.

Mitsubishi Electric America Foundation: Grants for Youth with Disabilities
http://www.meaf.org/how_to_apply/
The Mitsubishi Electric America Foundation Grants program is dedicated to helping young Americans with disabilities maximize their potential and fully participate in society. The foundation supports organizations and projects within its mission that have broad scope and impact and demonstrate potential for replication at other sites. A major program emphasis is inclusion: enabling young people with disabilities to have full access to educational, vocational, and recreational opportunities, and to participate alongside their non-disabled peers. Maximum award: $90,000. Eligibility: 501(c)3 organizations. Deadline for Concept Papers: June 1, 2015.

Arthur Vining Davis Foundations Seeks Proposals to Strengthen Secondary Education
http://www.avdf.org/FoundationsPrograms/SecondaryEducation.aspx
The Arthur Vining Davis Foundations offers $100,000-$200,000 grants to support a wide range of innovative professional development programs that strengthen teachers in grades 9-12 and their teaching. For example, projects might be designed to improve professional development for in-service and pre-service teachers, strengthen teaching skills, support practical research in teacher and high school education, or encourage innovative use of technology and new techniques for presentation of classroom materials in high schools. Projects should aim to develop solutions with potential for wide application or replication by others. Requests to support well-established programs should be for initiatives with the potential to improve the program significantly. Special consideration will be given to projects in their early stages that address the concerns and problems of secondary education on a national level. In considering proposals to support high school teaching, sustained partnerships between the faculties of colleges (e.g., arts and sciences and education) and school districts, or collaborative efforts involving reform organizations, colleges/universities, and high schools are encouraged. Eligible institutions include but are not limited to public and private colleges and universities, graduate schools of education, and freestanding educational institutes. Ongoing deadlines.

Discover: Pathway to Financial Success Grant
http://www.pathwaytofinancialsuccess.org/get-a-grant
Discover is investing up to $10 million in financial education, and any high school can apply for a grant toward a financial education curriculum. Applying schools must have implemented or be looking to implement a financial education curriculum; have a measurement tool planned or in place to assess participation in and comprehension of the financial education curriculum; and agree to share overall results of the measurement tool’s pre- and post-curriculum testing with Discover upon the program’s completion to assess what worked and what didn’t. Maximum award: varies. Eligibility: high schools in the United States. Deadline: none.

Dollar General: Beyond Words Library Disaster Relief
http://www.ala.org/awardsgrants/awards/166/apply
Dollar General, in collaboration with the American Library Association (ALA), the American Association of School Librarians (AASL) and the National Education Association (NEA), is sponsoring a school library disaster relief fund for public school libraries in the states served by Dollar General.

The fund will provide grants to public schools whose school library program has been affected by a disaster. Grants are to replace or supplement books, media and/or library equipment in the school library setting. Maximum award: up to $15,000 to replace or supplement books, media and/or library equipment. Eligibility: public school libraries Pre K-12 located within 20 miles of a Dollar General store, distribution center or corporate office that have lost their building or incurred substantial damage or hardship due to a natural disaster (tornado, earthquake, hurricane, flood, avalanche, mudslide), fire or an act recognized by the federal government as terrorism; or have absorbed a significant number (more than 10% enrollment) of displaced/evacuee students. Deadline: none.

Fender Music Foundation: Grants
http://www.fendermusicfoundation.org/grants/?sec=info
Fender Music Foundation grants of instruments and equipment are awarded to music academies, schools, local music programs and national music programs across America, particularly in-school music classes, in which the students make music; after-school music programs that are not run by the school; and music therapy programs, in which the participants make the music. Maximum award: up to 8 instruments. Eligibility: established, ongoing and sustainable music programs in the United States, which provide music instruction for people of any age who would not otherwise have the opportunity to make music. Deadline: rolling.

AASA: National Superintendent of the Year
http://www.aasa.org/content.aspx?id=3404
The American Association of School Administrators (AASA) National Superintendent of the Year Program pays tribute to the talent and vision of the men and women who lead the nation’s public schools. Maximum award: recognition; a $10,000 scholarship to a student in the high school from which the National Superintendent of the Year graduated. Eligibility: Any superintendent, chancellor, or top leader of a school system in the United States, Canada, or international school who plans to continue in the profession. Deadline: varies by state.

To top

Acknowledgements

Portions of this month’s NASET Special Educator e-Journal were excerpted from:

• Committee on Education and the Workforce
• FirstGov.gov-The Official U.S. Government Web Portal
• National Center on Secondary Education and Transition, an electronic newsletter of the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET), available online at http://www.ncset.org/enews. NCSET is funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs.
• National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth
• National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities
• National Institute of Health
• National Organization on Disability
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
• U.S. Department of Education
• U.S. Department of Education-The Achiever
• U.S. Department of Education-The Education Innovator
• U.S. Department of Labor
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration
• U.S. Office of Special Education
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

The National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET) thanks all of the above for the information provided for this edition of the NASETSpecial Educator e-Journal.

To top

To learn more click on the image above or – Click here

To Download a PDF file for this issue of the Special Educator e-Journal – CLICK HERE

To Download a XPS file for this issue of the Special Educator e-Journal – CLICK HERE

NOTE: To save on your computer – Right Click and use “Save As” or “Save Target As”.