June 2020 – Special Educator e-Journal

Table of Contents

• Special Education Legal Alert. By Perry A. Zirkel
• Buzz from the Hub
• The ‘Life Passport’ – Transition support for young people with Special Needs. By Thomas Richardson
• Transfer of Learning Key Elements. By Marissa Desiree Pardo and Natasha Quesada
• A Push for Inclusion: Meeting Students with Disabilities’ Needs. By Yariana Bushman
• Meeting the Educational Needs of Students with Disabilities. By Olivia Perez
• Self-Regulation Interventions for Students with Disabilities. By Caroline E Ibanez 
• Parents’ Experiences in Special Education: A Literature Review. By Larybett Pirela Moreno
• Book Reviews:
  • Leverage Leadership 2.0. By Daniella Parra
  • The Coaching Habit: Say Less, Ask More & Change The Way You Lead Forever”. By Jane Doyle
  • Be Excellent on Purpose: Intentional Strategies for Impactful Leadership. By Buruuj Tunsill
• Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET
• Acknowledgements

­

Special Education Legal Alert

By Perry A. Zirkel

© May 2020

This month’s update concerns two issues that were subject to recent court decisions of general significance: (a) the school district of residence’s IDEA obligations to students in private schools, and (b) liability for defamation arising from the special education context.  For further examination of such issues, see Publications section at perryzirkel.com

As summarized in the May 2018 Legal Alert based on my earlier article, the school district of the family’s residence has an obligation to students voluntarily placed in private schools independent of the concurrent obligation of the district where the private school is located.  In general this obligation is to provide an evaluation, if necessary, and to offer FAPE to the eligible child.  However, neither OSEP guidance nor the growing line of case law had made particularly clear the extent of the parent’s role in triggering this obligation.  In A.B. v. Abington School District (2020), a federal district court addressed this specific issue.  In this case, the parents of child with autism placed him in a private school at the start of fifth grade.  During sixth grade at the private school, the parent emailed the school district, stating: “I’m interested in what programs the district can offer [the child].”  The overall question is whether the obligation applies on an ongoing basis unless the parents make clear their intent to keep the child at the private school.  If, instead, it requires an affirmative parental request, the specific question is whether this parental statement suffices to trigger the school district of residence’s obligation?
First, as a threshold and distinctive matter, note that the school district did not require the parents to enroll the child in the district as a prerequisite to evaluation and a proposed IEP.	An earlier court decision in the same jurisdiction, Shane v. Carbondale Area School District (2017), rejected the prerequisite of enrollment.
Second, for the overall question, the court concluded that the obligation required a parental request, not the expression of the opposite, which is the intent to keep the child at the private school.	The court interpreted the opposite language in the OSEP guidance as solely addressing which district—that of location or that of residence—has a FAPE obligation.
Finally, for the specific question, the court ruled that the obligation requires a parental request objectively manifesting the desire for the action of an evaluation and/or an offer of FAPE.	Applying this standard, the court concluded that the parent’s communication was reasonably understood only as a request for information, not for an evaluation or proposed IEP.
The bottom line is not to confuse the school district of residence’s IDEA obligations to private school students with those of the school district of location; these obligations overlap but are independent of each other.  Although this court decision is not necessarily generalizable to other jurisdictions, both parents and school districts need to pay careful attention to their  respectively applicable roles when the child is enrolled in a private school and either is eligible under the IDEA or—as a matter of child find—is reasonably suspected of being IDEA eligible.

In August 2017, an Internet periodical published an article entitled “Alabama School Board Member Considers Institutionalization for Special Education Students.”  The gist of the article was the following quoted statement by Ella Bell, a long-time member of the state board of education (SBOE), during a meeting discussing the academic performance scores of the state’s public school students: “‘Is it against the law for us to establish perhaps an academy on special education … so that our scores that already are not that good would not be further cut down by special-ed’s test scores?’”  Illustrative of its criticism of Bell, the article commented, “The idea that a SBOE member would even seriously ask the question about returning to a practice of institutionalization demonstrates a tragic lack of knowledge and thoughtfulness.”  Bell sued the publisher and the author for defamation,* asserting, for example, that she had not used the word “institutionalization.”  The trial court dismissed the suit, thus resolving the matter without even proceeding to the next step prior to trial.  Bell appealed, seeking reversal of the dismissal.
In Bell v. Smith (2019), the state supreme court upheld the dismissal of Bell’s suit, concluding that “a fair reading of . . . [the] article reveals it to be an expression of opinion that does not mislead the readers about the contents of Bell’s actual statements.”	Examining not only the headline, but also the various statements in the article, the court concluded that a reasonable reader would readily understand it to be “a piece of advocacy expressing Smith’s opinion that the people of Alabama should pay more attention to whom they elect to the [SBOE].”
The court warned that some cases would require moving to the next pretrial stage, summary judgment, when more contextual information is needed to determine whether the publication was an expression of opinion or a statement of fact.	In this case, the court concluded that Bell did not point to any additional context that would be necessary to determine whether the communication was reasonably capable of a constituting defamation, not merely opinion.
Although not addressed in this decision, Bell faced two alternative hurdles—(1) as a public official, the First Amendment requires the plaintiff in a defamation case to prove the defendant engaged in actual malice, and (2) even if she were not a public official or public figure, various state law immunities may apply to defamation in the context of public education.	The Supreme Court established the defamation defense against public officials in its famous decision in New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) and subsequently expanded its application to public figures.  The less well-known state law defenses, which vary by common law and state statute, include governmental immunity and qualified or absolute privileges in the public school context.
The bottom line is that, defamation suits in the specific context of special education or public education more generally are often—contrary to the plaintiffs’ sensitivities and knee-jerk notions of fairness—exercises in futility.

* “Defamation” is generally defined as dissemination of untruthful statements of fact that result in injury to one’s reputation. It has two subsets—libel, when in writing, and (b) slander, when in oral expression. Being a common law tort, its nuances and defenses vary from state to state.

To top

---

Buzz from the Hub

All articles below can be accessed through the following links:

 

https://www.parentcenterhub.org/buzz-may2020-issue1/

https://www.parentcenterhub.org/buzz-april2020-issue2/

https://www.parentcenterhub.org/coronavirus-resources/

 

Framing the Issue of Equity

Video | Shifting the Narrative to Advance Racial Equity

Foundations and nonprofits alike often struggle to communicate effectively about the importance of racial equity in their work. Having the skills to persuade skeptical audiences and activate existing supporters is increasingly necessary for the successful delivery of any organization’s mission. This video discusses best practices and new approaches shown to advance equity across issues and communities.

Racial Equity Tools
Racial Equity Tools is designed to support individuals and groups working to achieve racial equity. Content is organized by the tabs across the top of the page: fundamentals, plan, act, evaluate, connect, and curricula.

Data Sources Reveal Current Realities

Where to look to capture the current profile of the nation, your state, a specific population, even your neighborhood? Start with these resources.

America’s Children
Here, you can find the most recent statistics on children and families in the United States across 41 report indicators, covering a range of domains: family and social environment, economic circumstances, health care, physical environment and safety, behavior, education, and health.

The State of America’s Children 2020
Children remain the poorest age group in America. Nearly 1 in 6 lived in poverty in 2018—nearly 11.9 million children. The youngest children are the poorest and nearly 73% of poor children in America are children of color.

The Demographics of the Nation or Your State
Explore the many dimensions of the nation’s population at the U.S. Census Bureau, such as race and ethnicity, families and their living arrangements, health, education, employment, housing, and income and poverty. Find out your state’s data by entering the name of your state in the search box at the top of the page.

Specifics at the School Level
Using Search for Public Schools, you can see demographics for every public school in your zip code zone, city, or state.

Stuck at Home No More

Here are two resources for everyone to enjoy during at-home learning and play. You could get lost here, exploring history, outer space, and Earth itself.

NASA at Home — For Kids and Families
A fantastic collection of science lessons, activities, and virtual tours for kids curated by NASA.

Ken Burns in the Classroom
Ken Burns and his collaborators have been creating historical documentary films for more than 40 years. The full-length film series and short videos in Ken’s online classroom cover the spectrum of school subjects and grade levels, eras, and topics. We warn you—you’ll never want to leave.

Also for Parents Schooling at Home

Parents: Supporting Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic
The IRIS Center has created a new module specifically for parents to address their need for reliable, easy-to-understand resources to support their children’s learning at home. The module includes practical, real-world tips and strategies for keeping up with what a child is expected to learn; creating learning spaces in crowded living spaces; and reducing distractions and other obstacles to learning.

4 aplicaciones educativas que se pueden usar sin conexión a Internet
(Educational apps that you can use without an Internet connection) Si su familia tiene acceso limitado a internet o si no tiene banda ancha en casa, Common Sense Media le recomenda algunas aplicaciones educativas y divertidas que sus chicos podrán utilizar sin necesidad de internet.

Virtual IEP Meeting Tips
Are you about to hold or participate in a virtual IEP team meeting? These tip sheets are designed to support both school officials and families. Included are tech tips, tips for hosting such a meeting, tips for participants, a sample agenda in English and Spanish, and a 1-page infographic about virtual meetings (also available in English and Spanish). Developed collaboratively by 6 OSEP-funded centers, including CPIR.

Coronavirus Resources

Coronavirus.COVID-19! What to do, where to turn?

The amount of information that’s constantly emerging is so staggering, it seems nearly impossible to keep up. At CPIR we thought you might find it helpful to have a brieflist of resources to address key issues such as multilanguage materials to share, places parents can turn to as so many schools are closed for now, and telecommuting tips to help with maintaining social distancing practices.  The list is nowhere near exhaustive, nor is it intended to be. We’ll be continually updating what’s here, and posting selective new info via our Facebook and Twitter feeds.

May these resources inform you without overwhelming and may you find them useful and timely to share with the families and the professionals you serve.

Guidance from the U.S. Department of Education (and Others)

From the Federal Government and Congress | Coronavirus Relief Package
Just passed by Congress and signed by the President, here’s an early summary of what the legislation contains. This will no doubt be an unfolding story, so stay tuned as the legislation is enacted.

From DOE | Q & A on Providing Services to Children with Disabilities During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outreach
(Also see other-language infographics created by Family Network on Disabilities in Florida that explain this guidance from DOE.)

From OCR at DOE | Supplemental Fact Sheet: Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Preschool, Elementary and Secondary Schools While Serving Children with Disabilities  
(March 21, 2020) This fact sheet explains that as a school district takes necessary steps to address the health, safety, and well-being of all its students and staff, educators can use distance learning opportunities to serve all students.

From DOE | Broad Flexibilities for States to Cancel Testing During National Emergency
(March 20) DOE announces that students impacted by school closures due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic can bypass standardized testing for the 2019-2020 school year. Upon a proper request, the Department will grant a waiver to any state that is unable to assess its students due to the ongoing national emergency, providing relief from federally mandated testing requirements for this school year.

From DOE | COVID-19 Information and Resources for Schools and School Personnel
Resource list that includes links to the CDC, guidance from the Office for Civil Rights, the Office of Postsecondary Education, and more.

From DOE | Webinar on Online Education and Website Accessibility
7-minute video.

From OCR at DOE | Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Schools While Protecting the Civil Rights of Students
4-page fact sheet, primarily aimed at education leaders.

Legal FAQs on Coronavirus, School Closings, and Special Education
Some basics on what most of us are worried and wondering about.

COVID-19 and Students with Disabilities
From the National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools.

Map: Coronavirus and School Closures
From EDWeek, this US map tracking school closures is updated twice daily.

State-by-State Coronavirus News
Want to see the latest goings-on in your state or another? What’s closed? What’s open? What orders have been put in place at the state or local level?

COVID-19 Info in Other Languages or Formats

The CDC, of course!
(Available in English, simplified Chinese, and Spanish)
Among the many dozen of resources on the coronavirus from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are two that Parent Centers may wish to share with families: (1) What you need to know; and (2) What to do if you are sick.

Talking to Children About COVID-19 | A Parent Resource
(Available in English, Spanish, Amharic, Chinese, and Korean)
Children look to adults for guidance on how to react to stressful events such as COVID-19. They need calmly delivered, factual information that’s age appropriate, with concrete instruction about positive preventive measures. This guidance comes from the National Association of School Nurses and the National Association of School Psychologists.

Explaining in graphic form DOE’s guidance on providing services to children with disabilities during the coronavirus outbreak
(Available in English, Spanish, Russian, and Haitian-Creole) | Thank you, Family Network on Disabilities, for this fine work!

4 from Understood.org
(Available in English and Spanish) | Check out these 4 resources available at understood.org: (1) How to talk about coronavirus with kids; (2) School closings and special education; (3) Activities to keep kids busy at home; and (4) Disability issues at work. The same tips and updates are available in Spanish.

From Washington State, fact sheets on the virus
(Available in English, Amharic, Arabic, simplified Chinese, traditional Chinese, Hindi, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, and Vietnamese)
Wow!

Plain language info about COVID-19, by and for people with disabilities
Simple wording, lots of graphics illustrating key points and important protective things to know.

COVID-19 Information in Different Languages, with Videos
(Available in Spanish, simplified Chinese, traditional Chinese, Vietnamese, and Arabic)
Brief info about the coronavirus, how it spreads, and how to protect yourself and find help. Includes videos!

Telecommuting Technology and Tips

Need to hold meetings virtually?
Here are some ways to do it.

Free Zoom Personal | Host up to 100 participants, Unlimited 1 to 1 meetings, 40 minute limit on group meetings, Unlimited number of meetings, online support, video conferencing, web conferencing

Free Microsoft Team | Microsoft Teams is a hub for teamwork in Office 365. Keep all your team’s chats, meetings, files, and apps together in one place.

Free G Suites and Google Hangouts | advanced Hangouts Meet video-conferencing capabilities with up to 250 participants per call, Live streaming for up to 100,000 viewers within a domain, ability to record meetings and save them to Google Drive.

Free Slack for small businesses | Access to 10,000 of your team’s most recent messages, 10 integrations with other apps like Google Drive, Office 365, 1:1 voice and video calls between teammates.

Comcast offering ‘Internet Essentials’ package free for low-income customers for 60 days

Tips for Working Remotely

How to work from home
Some good tips and practical advice here.

Remote work starter guide for employees: how to adjust to work-from-home
Thoughtful suggestions, especially for people who are working remotely for the first time.

Schooling at Home

School closure learning guide during Coronavirus (COVID-19)
If school has closed, these resources will help your child learn from home. Find out how to set up at-home learning and use Great Schools’ grade-based resources to fill in the gaps.

Great Schools free worksheets in English and Spanish for different ages and grades
These actually look like fun for kids while emphasizing certain skills and addressing grade-appropriate information.

Free online learning resources during COVID-19 closures
From National Center for Families Learning: Wonderopolis.org is a free online learning resource visited by 13 million students, teachers, and parents annually. Also explore NCFL’s Out-of-School Time free resources page.

Resources for Learning at Home When Schools Close
Links to resources for teaching reading/English language arts, math, writing, science, and social studies.

11 Tips for Parents Starting to Homeschool in a Hurry
A lot of us are in the same boat!

Handpicked recommendations for learning apps, games, and websites for kids
Common Sense Media offers this list of  “best for learning.”  Topics range from skills essential to life and work in the 21st century, to traditional academic subjects, to recommendations for particular settings or types of kids. Organized by age of child.

Virtual Early Intervention Home Preparation Checklist for Families
A 1-page checklist of how to prepare for a virtual early intervention home visit.

Coping Tips and Other Useful Info

Tips For Social Distancing, Quarantine, And Isolation During An Infectious Disease Outbreak
From SAMHSA.

Daily tips (in video form) for parents
Every day, the Child Mind Institute publishes a video and social tile with a tip for supporting families through the coronavirus crisis. Sign up to get these tips, and tell the families you serve to do so, too.

How You and Your Kids Can De-Stress During Coronavirus
From PBS for Parents.

What To Do With Kids At Home On Coronavirus Break For Who Knows How Long (Without Losing It)
Interesting resources and good advice here.

12 World-Class Museums You Can Visit Online
The digital age has made it possible—easy, even—to visit some of the world’s most famous museums from the comfort of your own home, including the Louvre, the National Gallery of Art, the British Museum, the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, and NASA.

To top

---

The ‘Life Passport’ – Transition Support For Young People with Special Needs

By Thomas Richardson

Abstract

In this article, a Scottish teacher of Special Education, Thomas Richardson, discusses transition support in Scotland and beyond for children and young people with special needs. He refers to his doctoral research in which he examined the effect of new legislation in Scotland upon the transition experiences of children and young people there with special needs. He found, for example, that while transition planning meetings had diminished in frequency since the legislation was introduced in the mid-2000s, the remaining meetings were now centred more upon the needs of the person than formerly. He also found that a need for a co-ordinator or link person to guide the young person through transition processes recurred in legislation and research and he wonders if an electronic ‘life passport’ might make this process easier and lead to earlier identification of needs for children and more personalised support throughout their childhood.

The author of this article, Thomas Richardson, is a teacher of Special Education (known as Additional Support Needs – ASN – in Scotland) in a large Scottish secondary school for students aged between 11 and 18.

I have had a considerable professional and academic interest in educational transitions for many years. Transitions (and collaboration between professionals and families) was a focus of my Doctorate in Education (2015) with the University of Dundee, a Scottish University. Two key educational transitions in Scotland are the transition between primary and secondary school at the age of about 11, and the transition beyond school (e.g. to college, work or university) at age 16-18.

In Scotland, and in the United Kingdom as a whole, there has been a focus in legislation and in research upon educational transitions and the collaboration between educators, other professionals, parents/carers and the children/young people themselves at times of transition in recent years. Inter-professional collaboration in education is promoted strongly by the UK government (Bagley et al. 2004; Mittler, 2007). The UK and Scottish governments have, over many years, voiced their strong support for the notion of inter-professional collaboration in the support of children with ASN.

In the USA, relatively recent legislation in the US, which aims to drive the inclusion agenda for children with disabilities, is the IDEA Act of 1990 and its 1997 Amendment (Nolan, 2004; Bollmer et al. 2010).

In my doctoral study, I looked particularly at post-school transitions at a time when existing support structures in Scotland (like the ‘Future Needs Assessment’) were becoming obsolete and new legislation was being introduced (‘The Additional Support for Learning (Scotland) Act’ 2005, amended in 2009). I wanted to examine the extent to which these changes would affect the experience for young people of post-school transitions with ASN across Scotland.

To gather data for this study, I interviewed students with ASN, staff and parents at a local further education college about the experiences of the students when they made the transition from school to college. I also carried out an internet survey with staff across Scotland from education, health, social work and careers (now ‘Skills Development Scotland’) who were involved in transition planning and support for young people with ASN.

Additionally, I examined the minutes of transition planning meetings which took place around the time of the introduction of the new legislation.

Broadly, the outcomes of my study included the perception that post-school transition meetings had decreased in number following the introduction of the new legislation but those that did take place had become more young person-centred. Additionally, my study suggested that a ‘key person’ to help the young person navigate the transition process could be useful. I addition, ‘feedback loops’ to provide information about the destinations of school leavers would be beneficial.

Over a considerable period of time, there seems to have been a requirement in Scottish and US legislation for a ‘co-ordinator’ to be identified to manage the post-school transition for vulnerable young people and/or those with additional support needs (Children Scotland Act 1995; Beattie Report 1999, IDEA 1990, The Children and Young People Act 2014).

Since completing the study, I have extended my interest in ‘transitions’ by becoming the primary to secondary ASN transition co-ordinator in my school network. This role is supported by my line manager and other senior staff. The role involves visits to all the primary schools in our cluster and the facilitation of visits to the Academy for children in the last year of primary school with ASN. This includes collaboration with the school Pupil Support Worker (PSW), who also runs transition sessions here. I also work with senior pupils with ASN who are about to move on to post school settings e.g. work and college. This involves collaboration with Skills Development Scotland (SDS) staff and the design and delivery of specialist ‘world of work’ courses (e.g. Employment Skills: Preparing for Employment – this is a course offered by the Scottish Qualifications Authority, SQA, for children and young people with support needs).

Feedback from staff, pupils and parents/carers suggests that, for example, having a ‘known face’ visiting all the primary schools / pupils to prepare them for the primary to secondary transition sessions is beneficial. Additionally, when the same member of staff (myself) delivers the sessions and, in some cases, works with the pupils once they are attending the Academy, there seems to be a positive sense of ‘continuity’ in the process.

The ‘Life Passport’ ?

As stated, one of the recommendations from my research was that there should be a ‘link professional’ to guide the young person through the transition process. This person might be a teacher, other professional or member of the young person’s family, but they should be someone that the family trusted and could relate to. In Scotland, proposals were developed for a ‘named person’ to be assigned to every child who would have a co-ordinating ‘link’ role in the young person’s life to, ‘ensure that there is someone who is responsible for helping them getting the support they need if and when they need it…’ (www.gov.scot). However, this proposal was abandoned in September 2019 (www.bbc.co.uk).

An alternative might be an electronic ‘passport’ containing key information about the child / young person which could help ensure that their needs were met throughout their school careers. This ‘Life Passport’ electronic document would be initiated at birth for every child by a health professional. The passport could contain information about the child’s physical and cognitive development compared to developmental standards and so any discrepancies could be ‘flagged up’ at an early point. From the nursery stage, the passport could contain educational information also. The document could be updated every year and carried by child into adulthood (becoming ‘theirs’ at 18?). School staff could access the passport on a ‘need to know’ basis, but, as far as possible, the passport would be ‘owned’ by the child’s family, and by the child / young person themselves. Such an approach would require government support and coordination, plus, in all likelihood, collaboration between education, health and social services. That government might be in the United Kingdom, the United States of America or elsewhere in the world, but such an approach could lead to far earlier identification of support needs for an individual and a far more ‘tailored’, individualised approach to their support from schools, health and social services throughout their childhood and beyond.

References

Bagley, C., Ackerley, C., & Rattray, J. (2004). Social exclusion, sure-start and organizational social capital: evaluating interdisciplinary multi-agency working in an education and health work programme. Journal of Education Policy, 19(5), 595-607.

Bollmer, J., Cronin, R., Brauen, M., Howell, B., Fletcher, P., Gonin, R., & Jenkins, F. (2010). A study of State’s Monitoring and Improvement Practices Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. US Department of Education: National Center for Special Education Research.

Mittler, P. (2007). Education – The Missing Link at Transition. Tizard Learning Disability Review, 12(2), 14-21.

Nolan, J. (2004). The U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Tracing inclusion and exclusion of the disabled from Ford to Bush II. (Paper presented at the Society of History of Education (U.K.) conference in Dublin, Ireland, November 25, 2004).

The Scottish Executive. (1999). Implementing Inclusiveness Realising Potential. (‘The Beattie Report’). Retrieved from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1999/09/ImplementingInclusivenes/Q/Page/1

The Scottish Executive. (2004). Education (Additional Support for Learning) Act. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government. Retrieved from https://education.gov.scot/improvement/research/education-additional-support-for-learning-scotland-act-2004/

The Scottish Executive. (2009). Education (Additional Support for Learning) Act (Amendment). Edinburgh: The Scottish Government. Retrieved from: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1381/1/0089284.pdf

The Scottish Executive. (1995). The Children (Scotland) Act. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.scot/premium-publications/scotlands-children-children-scotland-act-1995-regulations-guidance-volume-1-support-protection-children-families/pages/1/

The Scottish Government. (2014). The Children and Young Person (Scotland) Act 2014. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.scot/premium-publications/children-young-people-scotland-act-2014-national-guidance-part-12/pages/3/

www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 13.3.20).

www.scot.gov (accessed 13.3.20).

To top

---

A Push for Inclusion: Meeting Students with Disabilities’ Needs

By Yariana Bushman

Abstract

Due to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), we are seeing an increase of students with disabilities (SWD) in an inclusive and collaborative general education setting, changing the role of the general education teacher. This push for the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) has been a victory in the view of families of students with disabilities. However, this push has not been as ideal as some parents would have hoped. Many questioning whether or not teachers have sufficient knowledge of their child’s disability or how to meet their academic and behavioral needs best. These are meaningful discussions to be had to make the least restrictive environment a more responsive one for learners with disabilities.

The Push for Inclusion

Historically, students with disabilities (SWD) were excluded from the public school system and rarely ever received appropriate educational services. SWD’s were discounted from being educated with their peers. It wasn’t until the mid-1970s, where the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public Law 94–142) gave students with disabilities the right to a free appropriate public education.  In 2004 the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) made revisions implementing what we now know as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Among these updates, the law states that students with disabilities are ensured access to the general education classroom to the maximum extent possible, or more popularly known as the least restrictive environment (LRE).  Additionally, IDEA declares that at least one general education teacher required in the creation and implementation of the Individualized Education Plan of SWD (IDEA, 2004). Resulting in a rise of SWD in the general education classroom and an increase in the importance of the general education teachers role for SWD; Leaving many to wonder if teachers have sufficient training on the natures of disabilities, meeting the needs of SWD, their families, and the best practices in doing so. These are essential topics to discuss if we are to create a thriving, inclusive environment for all involved.

The Inclusion Classroom and the General Educators Role

Since the introduction of IDEA in 2004, the DOE has continued to push toward inclusive practices in our schools. This rise in schools trying to meet the guidelines set forth by IDEA generated more prevalence of these diverse types of classrooms. The DOE recognizes that “more than 62% of children with disabilities are in general education classrooms for 80% or more of their school day…” (About IDEA). Special Education Teachers are no longer solely responsible for SWD. This move from pull-out to inclusive programming significantly changes the roles of the general and special education teachers and creates the need for greater collaboration between them (Arthaud et al. 2007). General education teachers are now sharing the responsibility and integrating these students into their classrooms. They must be aware of how to best work with SWD and expected to understand their IEPs, accommodations, behavior interventions, modified curriculum, among being the content expert. However, many general education teachers are not sufficiently prepared to meet the needs of SWD.

 

Meeting Needs: Teacher Preparation, Knowledge, & Best Practices

Including SWD in the general education classroom in an inclusive or collaborative setting, has proven to be beneficial for student success when done correctly. If, while in the general education setting, students with disabilities have access to their services, accommodations, and given individualized instruction to continue to meet their needs with the cooperation of both the special and general education teacher, the inclusive setting would be beneficial for the student’s success. However, including the student in this placement is not enough, as some may think, proving the gaps of some teachers’ understanding of special education. Rock et al. (2008) explain: “To fully engage in and progress through the general classroom, students with disabilities need more than to be physically present in the classroom. They need group individualized instruction, supplementary aids and services, accommodations, and modifications to which they are entitled. It is unfortunate that many teachers lack training in ways that ensure students with disabilities cognitive access-an opportunity to participate actively and to profit from instruction linked to the general curriculum.”

Special education preparation programs for preservice teachers demonstrate the skills necessary to educate students with a wide variety of academic and behavioral needs across different settings (Nagro et al., 2017). Teacher preparation field experience in special education programs are often seen as “the cornerstone of special education teacher preparation” (Nagro et al., 2017). Still, these special education field experiences are not the field experiences preservice general education teachers are trained on. Most general educators are unaware of the importance of their role and their part in the education of SWD.  Teacher preparation programs, as well as district programs, need to examine and expand their methods of training to teachers in acquiring the working contributions of all stakeholders in SWDs’ educational needs, including their IEPs (Arthaud et al., 2007).

Most general education teachers lack the exposure to different exceptionalities and evidence-based practices that their special education colleagues have, often resulting in negative perceptions of SWD and their families.  In the study conducted by Starr and Foy (2012), results showed that “the ability of school personnel to manage children’s behavior effectively, teacher education and understanding of the disability, and effective communication and collaboration between parents and school personnel were themes that continually emerged and overlapped across all questions.” This same study asked parents to rate overall satisfaction of their child’s education, those who were not satisfied mention lack of teacher knowledge about the nature of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and effective interventions (Starr & Foy, 2012). Parents are often put in the position of having to educate teachers on how to best work with their child or teaching them of the disability itself due to this lack of preparation. One researcher found that merely 30% of parents of students with ASD in inclusive classrooms were satisfied with the level of teacher understanding about the disability (Starr & Foy, 2012). These low approvals from parents of students with ASD in an inclusive setting raise concerns on whether we are preparing teachers enough to meet these student’s needs in the least restrictive environment (LRE). If teachers are to provide beneficial instruction to all students in an inclusive setting, all teachers must receive the proper training and education to meet these different students’ needs. Consulting with special education teachers or communicating with parents on what are the techniques that work best for them are useful techniques to collaborate with all stakeholders involved to ensure student success. However, teachers should have basic knowledge of the students’ disability in order to be a productive member of that team.

Furthermore, some general educators might have negative perceptions of special education because of their lack of understanding of how to reach them best, leaving them worried about the success of the typical student. Teachers are fearful that inclusion will decrease the typical students’ academic achievement, reduce the time teachers dedicate to the general education students as a whole, and the likelihood that these students were to imitate inappropriate behaviors of students with disabilities (Garriott et al., 2003). However, the research consistently demonstrates the opposite of these claims. Contradictory to these statements, students with disabilities are more likely to model the appropriate behaviors of typical students (Garriott et al., 2003). Professional developments and research, on limitations and the best practices, when teaching SWD would be instrumental in helping teachers feel knowledgeable on how to implement effective instruction in an inclusive setting. Starr and Foy (2012) note that those parents who reported that they were satisfied in the quality of their students’ education, overwhelmingly mention collaboration and effective communication as contributing aspects. Driving the point that educators require training on special education practices including, communication and collaboration with their colleagues and, most importantly, the families of SWD to implement the inclusion model effectively. The importance of teacher preparation for the ever-changing general education setting population has never been more critical as the push for inclusion rises.

References

About IDEA. Retrieved from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/about-idea/

Arthaud, T. J., Aram, R. J., Breck, S. E., Doelling, J. E., & Bushrow, K. M. (2007). Developing collaboration skills in preservice teachers: A partnership between general and special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 30(1), 1-12.

Garriott, P. P., Miller, M., & Snyder, L. (2003). Preservice teachers’ beliefs about inclusive education: What should teacher educators know? Action in Teacher Education, 25(1), 48.

Individuals with disabilities education act, (2004).

Nagro, S. A., & deBettencourt, L. U. (2017). Reviewing special education teacher preparation field experience placements, activities, and research: Do we know the difference maker? Teacher Education Quarterly, 44(3), 7-33.

Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACH: A framework for differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 52(2), 31.

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.

To top

---

---

Self-Regulation Interventions for Students with Disabilities

By Caroline E Ibanez

Abstract

This literature review seeks to examines different aspects of self-regulation interventions for students with disabilities and identify strategies to increase self-regulation which will improvement behavior and academics. Self-regulation is a crucial skill that children develop from infancy through adolescence that helps monitor thoughts, behavior, and emotions. Students with disabilities have difficulties recognizing when circumstances around them are causing them to become less regulated. When they are less regulated, it can cause challenging behaviors or withdrawing from an academic task. This is a concern within an educational setting due to the negative effects of having limited self-regulation skills can have on academic progress and behavioral expectations.

Keywords: self-regulation, disabilities, challenging behaviors, academic progress, behavioral expectations

Self-Regulation Interventions for Students with Disabilities

Previous studies have defined self-regulation as the process of one using one’s own thoughts, feelings, and actions to manage one’s behavior which is essential to the learning process. (Damsuwan, Suwanmonkha, Thummaphan, & Yoelao, 2013; Reid, Schartz, & Trout, 2005).  Self-regulation is also known as self-management, anger management, impulse control, and self-control. The purpose of learning self-regulation skills for students with disabilities is for them to independently control their impulsive behavior, emotions, sensory issues and deal with different struggles they may face.

There are several psychological and neurological theories of when self-regulation develops. According to Thomas & Waters (2014, P. 174) children by age five can recognize emotional expression and understand the causes as well as how that emotion can be reactivated by external reminders. Then, by age seven, child can make a connection between emotions and beliefs and understand that emotions don’t always have to be expressed. Finally, around the age of nine children are aware of how to make meaning and or regulate emotions. When working students with disabilities it is important to keep in mind the ages of understanding and regulating emotions may vary based on the child’s individual developmental milestones.

Self-Regulation for Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder

Reid, R., Trout, A. L., & Schartz, M. (2005) conducted a study on self-regulation intervention within in the context of the classroom. The study focused on intervention strategies such as self-monitoring (SM), self-monitoring plus reinforcement (SM+R), self-reinforcement (SRF), and self-management (SMGT) for students with Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD). There was a total of fifty-one participants with ADHD having difficulties in a school environment whether it’s disciplinary problems or academic problems. The study divided the students to collected data on one aspect of the self-regulation interventions.  The SM intervention consist of monitoring attention and performance. Students monitoring their attention is used as support for them to acknowledge his or her attention to a required task. SM performance is to help the students determine the amount of completion or accuracy to the task. SM intervention participants received no prompting during the task, the activities to no longer than ten to fifteen-minute. Teachers gave verbal and non-verbal cues to self-assess and self-record after the SM activities with systematically withdrawing cues over time. SM+R supports the same steps in SM, however, the student is awarded reinforcement from an outside source for changes in the target behavior. The purpose of combing SM+R is to increase the students feeling of being noticed for his or her efforts in self-assessing and self-recording. The SM+R intervention participants received tangible reinforcements for on task behaviors and accuracy of self-monitoring. The tangible items consist of stickers, token, edibles, choice of preferred activity, and/or good behavior marks sent home.  SRF is like SM+R however, if differs because the student is awarding themselves if they determine they reached the predetermined target behavior or criteria. SRF intervention participants had similar self-cuing methods to self-assess, self-record, and now self- reinforce their performance immediately after completion of task. SMGT is also known as self-evaluation which like SM because it requires students to self-assess and self-record a behavior at given times. However, SMGT has an additional step of evaluating accuracy. The SMGT intervention participants were asked to rate their behaviors from zero to five which is a likert scale rating. Then, the student’s self-evaluation is overlooked by a teacher or paraprofessional to determine the students rating matches the adults rating. The student should be awarded reinforcement if their self-evaluation is close to the desired outcome. The results show that self-regulation interventions created students with ADHD to display on task behavior, academic productivity and accuracy, and reduction of inappropriate or disruptive behaviors (Reid, R., Trout, A. L., & Schartz, M. 2005). Although the study demonstrated gains in academic and behavioral areas SMGT intervention was proven to be effective with on task behaviors and inappropriate behaviors but there was no data to support the effect on academic outcomes. Further studies need to be conducted to compare these self-regulation intervention methods on students with other disabilities.

Self-Regulation for Autism Spectrum Disorder

Thompson and Johnston (2013) conducted a research study with three pre-schools students who have Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). They investigated the use of Social Stories incorporated with sensory integrative-based strategies to improve self-regulation during a specific activity that they have difficulty with such as staying seated for circle time. Based on prior research children with ASD have sensory issues with the orientation to sensory input entering the nervous system and stimuli within the neurological system. As well as issues with understanding and reading social situations to formulate a socially acceptable response. The three preschool ASD participants demonstrated having difficulties with sensory input, engaged in behaviors that interfered with daily educational activities and having an interest in books which was determined by a likert scale rating. The Social Stories were developed to address the student’s individual behavioral difficulties and sensory processing problems. The Social Stories were read one on one and the average time spent on each session varied from seven to fifteen minutes. In addition to the Social Stories, objects were needed to reinforce the intervention such as weighted fabric, small squeezable ball, and a small toothbrush. The objects were utilized to support self-regulation by soothing and reducing stimulation levels though touching. After the Social Story intervention, the students transitioned to the activity that was identified as difficult for the student to display the desired behaviors. The Social Stories were easily accessible during the activity to help promote self-regulation. However, no-verbal or non-verbal prompts were given to encourage self-regulation. The results showed that all three participants had an increase in frequency of the desired behaviors during the transition to the activity that was identified as difficult.

When comparing the intervention study for students with ADHD and the study of interventions for students with ASD, the finding shows that both groups of participants had behavioral difficulties that interfered with educational activities. Both intervention studies had similarities such as the process not exceeding fifteen minutes, as well as, giving tangible reinforcement to support self-regulation. The interventions showed that teaching self-regulation strategies increased the desired behavior and independents in all participants regardless of the disability.

Special Education and Self-Regulation

After reviewing a substantial amount of literature for self-regulation and Special Education, there doesn’t seem to be any discussion about parent-teacher collaboration to enhance self-regulation skills in students with disabilities. Studies have shown early interventions and self-regulation interventions increase positive results for desired behaviors and academic outcomes. According to Mandic, Rudd, Hehir, & Acevedo-Garcia, (2012, p. 195) early intervention has continuously proven that parental involvement in education is an important predictor of cognitive and academic achievement.  For students to be able to carry over the self-regulation interventions outside of an educational setting, it is vital the parents are involved in the process and given guidance of how to support their child to become self-regulated. It is hopeful that there are several strategies that have been proven effective in helping students with different disabilities gain self-regulation skills to increase their academic progress and behavioral expectations. What is missing is the lack of parental input or support for earlier self-regulation interventions through collaboration.

References

Damsuwan, W., Suwanmonkha, S., Thummaphan, P., & Yoelao, D. (2013). The effects of using a program applying self-regulation in combination with teacher’s social support on learning behaviors of underachieving primary students. International Journal of Behavioral Science, 8(1), 1-16.

Thompson, R.A. & Waters, S.F. (2014). Children’s perceptions of the effectiveness of strategies for regulating anger and sadness. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(2), 174-181.

Reid, R., Trout, A. L., & Schartz, M. (2005). Self-regulation interventions for children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 361.

Thompson, R. M., & Johnston, S. (2013). Use of social stories to improve self-regulation in children with autism spectrum disorders. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 33(3), 271-284.

Duncan, G. J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). Family poverty, welfare reform, and child development. Child Development, 71(1), 188-196. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00133

Mandic, C. G., Rudd, R., Hehir, T., & Acevedo-Garcia, D. (2012). Readability of special education procedural safeguards. The Journal of Special Education, 45(4), 195-203. doi:10.1177/0022466910362774

Powell, D., Dunlap, G., & Fox, L. (2006). Prevention and Intervention for the Challenging Behaviors of Toddlers and Preschoolers.?Infants & Young Children,?19(1), 25–35.

Kochanska, G., Coy, K. C., & Murray, K. T. (2003, March 3). The Development of Self? Regulation in the First Four Years of Life.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Kuypers, L.M. (2011). The zones of regulation ®: A curriculum designed to foster self-regulation and emotional control. San Jose, CA: Social Thinking Publishing.

To top

---

Parents’ Experiences in Special Education: A Literature Review

By Larybett Pirela Moreno

Abstract

Amid the diverse experiences of parents in special education, there are commonalities that imply the existence of issues which transcend the specific situation of any child, parent, or professional. The moment parents perceive or are informed that their child has a special need, they are thrown down the rabbit hole of the special education system. Parents’ experiences in this system are fraught with feelings of uncertainty, unmet expectations, and confusion. In order to better support students with disabilities, teachers and parents need to form meaningful partnerships. However, in order to effectively partner with parents, teachers must understand the experiences in the special education system from parents’ perspectives. This paper provides a review of the literature of parents’ experiences in the special education system with the aim to inform teachers’ approaches to form partnerships with parents of SWD.

Introduction

Parents’ experiences in special education are diverse (Brown, Ouellette-Kuntz, Hunter, Kelley, Cobigo, & Lam, 2010; Valle, 2011; Vaughan & Super, 2019; Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012). Nevertheless, amid these diverse experiences there are commonalities that imply the existence of issues which transcend the specific situation of any child, parent, or professional (Valle, 2011, p. 184). At one point or another during their journey in the special education system, all parents experience feelings of uncertainty, unmet expectations, and/or confusion (Brown et. al, 2010; Griner & Stewart, 2012; Irvine, 2012; Mandic, Rudd, Hehir, & Acevedo-Garcia, 2010; Starr & Foy, 2010; Valle, 2011; Vaughan & Super, 2019; Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012). Valle (2011) states that the moment parents perceive or are informed that their child has a special need, they are thrown down the “rabbit hole” of the special education system (p. 185). Parents know they need to get help for their children, but they do not know how to get it or even the type of help they should get. In order to better support students with disabilities, teachers and parents need to form meaningful partnerships. However, in order to effectively partner with parents, teachers must understand the experiences in the special education system from parents’ perspectives. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on parents’ experiences within the special education system. The following questions guided this review: (a) what areas within the special education system cause the most dissatisfaction to parents? and (b) what practical steps can be taken to address these areas of dissatisfaction? 

Areas of Dissatisfaction for Parents

The literature recounts various issues that cause discontent in parents of children with disabilities. However, most of these issues fall under two umbrellas: special education bureaucracy and interactions with professionals.

Special Education Bureaucracy

One of the aspects of special education that causes the most dissatisfaction for parents of students with disabilities is the extreme focus that is placed on legal documentation and compliance (Irvine, 2012).  Valle (2011) describes mothers’ experiences with the special education system as akin to going “down the rabbit hole” (p. 34). Parents complain about having to decipher confusing jargon regarding testing, labels, eligibility, etc. (Irvine, 2012; Valle, 2011).

Central to the special education bureaucracy—and a key source of frustration for parents—is the Individualized Education Program or IEP (Starr & Foy, 2012; Valle, 2011; Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012). Parents view the IEP as irrelevant to securing the provision of necessary services for their children with disabilities (Starr & Foy, 2012). In many instances, parents may even perceive IEP’s to negatively impact their children’s education. Wischowski and Cianca (2012) documented that “one parent referred to the documents [IEP’s] as ‘really bad resumes for kids’” (p. 36). Overall, parents feel that IEP’s do not accurately reflect their children’s strengths and weaknesses and play a minimal role in securing the provision of services to children with disabilities.

Nevertheless, the IEP document itself is not the only source of dissatisfaction. Much of the frustration parents experience in this regard begins at the IEP meeting. Valle (2011) describes mothers’ experiences at IEP meetings as fraught with confusing explanations of testing, eligibility, and services. Even the procedural safeguards documents—which explain the rights of parents and children with disabilities—have a readability level that makes the document hard to understand for most parents of children with disability (Mandic et al., 2012). Moreover, parents feel excluded from the decision-making process since their input is not sought prior to the writing of the IEP document (Valle, 2011). The fact that parents’ perspectives and needs are overlooked throughout the process of writing the IEP creates a source of frustration for parents of children with disabilities.

Interactions with Professionals

Wischnowski and Cianca (2012) highlight the tension that exists in parent-professional relationships, and lack of collaboration between them. Teachers’ greatest challenge is often believed to be that of working with parents. Misunderstanding and mistrust often characterize parent-teacher conferences and IEP meetings. In all, Wischnowski and Cianca (2012) describe most parents of children with disabilities as having feelings of “anxiety, panic, and vulnerability.” (p. 35).

One key aspect that complicates parent-teacher partnerships is the cultural differences that exist between home and school. For instance, Chen and Gregory (2010) state that parent-teacher partnerships have “been difficult to achieve, often as the result of cultural differences…” (p. 455). Moreover, Griner and Stewart (2012) mention that the disconnect between home culture and school culture exacerbates the levels of underachievement in racially, culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse (RCELD) students with disabilities. When this happens, parents perceive that their children are not being provided the necessary services and their needs are not being met by the system. This, in turn, causes parents to perceive higher levels of unmet needs (Brown et al., 2010). Irvine (2012) states that when there is cultural misunderstanding between the home and the school, miscommunication follows which then leads to tensions between parents and professionals. 

Another important issue that impedes parent-teacher interactions is the parents’ perception that teachers are not appropriately trained to provide services to children with disabilities. Starr and Foy (2012), surveyed 144 parents of children with ASD. The open-ended responses to this survey revealed that parents feel teachers should be better trained in disability.

Furthermore, Irvine (2012) pointed out that teacher education programs do not offer enough training in culturally responsive instructional practices (p. 270). In all, the perception that teachers are inadequately prepared to address the needs of diverse students with disabilities is a source of dissatisfaction for parents.

Improving Parents’ Experiences

Although there are many avenues to improving parents’ experiences in special education, the following two areas constitute the cornerstone upon which all other actions may be taken.

Training Teachers   

The first step to improving teacher training is to make sure that educator preparation programs include robust, comprehensive field experience opportunities (Nagro & deBettencourt, 2017; Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012).  Nagro and deBettencourt (2017) conducted a literature review which found that field experiences play a pivotal role in preparing teachers to deal with the complexities of the classroom. They concluded that the success of field experiences is because teachers can test their knowledge in real classroom situations. Furthermore, field experience is said to encourage self-reflection in teacher candidates (p. 24).  

Given the fact that field experience has proven to be a pivotal element in teacher preparation, it would make sense to require pre-service teachers to interact with parents during field experience programs. To support this concept, Wischnowski and Cianca (2012) studied the results of a pre-service teacher preparation course on parent-teacher collaboration. The course was designed following the format of a field experience for pre-service teachers. The essence of the course was to pair up teacher candidates with parents in order to work together to improve the education of children with disabilities.  After the course concluded, pre-service teachers admitted that they felt better prepared to deal with parents, understood that parent-teacher collaboration is possible, and learned that parents are an invaluable resource to teachers (p. 37).            

Finally, one key component which should be part of any teacher training program is the inclusion of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (Irvine, 2012). Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP) has proven to be pivotal in improving the educational experience of children with disabilities, especially those who are racially, culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse (RCELD) students (Griner & Stewart, 2012). Most importantly, CRP helps strengthen parent-teacher partnerships by prompting teachers to “build two-way bridges to families and respect cultural differences that might affect the forms of communication and collaboration” (Irvine, 2010, p. 272). In all, training teachers to be culturally aware is foundational to improving teacher-parent relationships.

Empowering Parents

One of the most effective strategies to improve parents’ experiences in special education is to empower their voices to be heard by professionals. But empowering parents to be heard does not mean that they should be simply viewed as sources of information. Parents’ input should be central to the decision-making process involving their children’s education (Chen & Gregory, 2010; Valle, 2011; Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012). Teachers must be able to engage in conversations with parents; but it is important that these conversations do not become interrogations that make parents feel like they must defend themselves (Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012). Instead, teachers must have meaningful conversations with parents in order to learn whether their educational practices are working (Valle, 2011). Therefore, it is important to involve parents in the process of writing their children’s IEP (Wischnowski & Cianca, 2012). And it is also important to collaborate with parents in all aspects of their children’s education, especially when it comes to determining the most effective intervention strategies to be implemented at home and school (Chen & Gregory, 2011).

Empowering parents’ voices does not only help improve teacher practice, but it also allows parents to effectively advocate for their children. However, parents cannot successfully advocate for their children unless they possess working knowledge of the law regulating special education, and of their rights as parents of children with disabilities (Valle, 2011, p. 184). One way to counter this situation is to design workshops that will equip parents with the knowledge they need in order to advocate for their children’s educational services (Valle, 2011). Another way is to empower parents of children with disabilities to work collectively rather than individually (Vaughan & Super, 2019). In their roles as parent-teacher-scholars, Vaughan and Super (2019) concluded that individual advocacy for their children is not as effective as working for a disability justice movement that will collectively improve special education for all children. Hence, it is fair to conclude that parents should be given the tools to advocate for the individual needs of their children, but they must also be provided with the means to work with other parents to make the educational system more inclusive for all children. According to Vaughan and Super (2019), this can be achieved by giving parents access to Disability Studies narratives. Doing so would give parents a network of support for collective action. In all, a balance must be reached between individual advocacy and group advocacy in order to improve the educational outcome of children with disabilities. Vaughan and Super (2019) summed it up best when they stated that, “…while professional-parent collaboration may be focused on securing an inclusion placement for an individual child, a Disability Studies network could advocate for creating more inclusive spaces for all children” (p. 1118).

Conclusion

Although parents of children with disabilities face unique experiences in the special education system, they all share the common desire to improve the lives of their children. However, the complex bureaucracy of the special education system and unfavorable interactions with professionals make it difficult for parents to advocate for educational opportunities that will improve their children’s lives. In order to reverse the prevailing tendency of the special education system to cause dissatisfaction in parents of children with disabilities, two overarching needs must be addressed. First, the need to train teachers to effectively collaborate with parents must be dealt with. To this end, teacher candidates must be exposed to field experience opportunities that would allow them to work with parents of children with disabilities. In addition, teacher training programs must include Culturally Responsive Pedagogy in order that teachers may be well-equipped to communicate and collaborate with parents of RCELD students. Second, the need to empower parents’ voices must be met. Parents must be equipped with knowledge and opportunities to advocate individually as well as collectively for their children with disabilities. All in all, it is possible to improve parents’ experiences in special education; but doing so will require purposeful action on the part of the larger professional education community.

References

Brown, H., hilary.brown@queensu.ca, Ouellette-Kuntz, H., Hunter, D., Kelley, E., Cobigo, V., & Lam, M. (2011). Beyond an autism diagnosis: Children’s functional independence and parents’ unmet needs. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 41(10), 1291-1302. doi:10.1007/s10803-010-1148-y

Chen, W., & Gregory, A. (2011). Parental involvement in the prereferral process: Implications for schools. Remedial and Special Education, 32(6), 447-457. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ946056&site=eds-livehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741932510362490

Griner, A. C., & Stewart, M. L. (2013). Addressing the achievement gap and disproportionality through the use of culturally responsive teaching practices. Urban Education, 48(4), 585-621. doi:10.1177/0042085912456847

Irvine, J. J. (2012). Complex relationships between multicultural education and special education: An african american perspective. Journal of Teacher Education, (4), 268. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/ login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.300980623&site=eds-live

Mandic, C. G., Rudd, R., Hehir, T., & Acevedo-Garcia, D. (2012). Readability of special education procedural safeguards. Journal of Special Education, 45(4), 195-203. doi:10.1177/0022466910362774

Nagro Sarah, A., & deBettencourt Laurie, U. (2017). Reviewing special education teacher preparation field experience placements, activities, and research: Do we know the difference maker? Teacher Education Quarterly, 44(3), 7. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/ login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.90010901&site=eds-live

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

Valle, J. W. (2011). Down the rabbit hole: A commentary about research on parents and special education. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(3), 183-190. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/docview/ 1018483073?accountid=10901

Vaughan, K. P., & Super, G. (2019). Theory, practice, and perspectives: Disability studies and parenting children with disabilities. Disability & Society, 34(7-8), 1102-1124. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1080/09687599.2019.1621741

Wischnowski, M. W., & Cianca, M. (2012). A new script for working with parents: Teacher candidates develop skills for collaborating with parents of students with disabilities. Phi Delta Kappan, (6), 34. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search. ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.284016621&site=eds-live

To top

---

Book Review: Leverage Leadership 2.0

By Daniella Parra

Bambrick-Santoyo, Paul. Leverage Leadership 2.0: A Practical Guide to Building Exceptional Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2018. 403pp. $36.95 – 16.59.

“Much of the current research has studied effective school leadership and identified the characteristics of effective schools. Yet these are often the outputs of effective schools, not the actions leaders took to get there.” Paul Bambrick-Santoyo strives to provide readers a practical roadmap to achieving exceptional student results that exceed expectations and are replicable. As the chief schools officer for Uncommon Schools and the founder and dean of the Leverage Leadership Institute, he has had over fifteen years of experience working with school leaders across the country, and has used his observations and experiences as a foundation for this guide. As Bambrick-Santoyo states, “this book’s goal is to show that the success these leaders enjoy does not stem from some magical quality but from a practical set of decisions that any leader, at any school, can apply” (p5).

At over 400 pages long, this book was surprisingly very easy to read, due in large part to the format of the book. Bambrick-Santoyo provides an introduction in which he explains the core of his thesis, a set of seven principles that he calls “The Seven Levers” and allow for consistent, transformational, and replicable growth. He also explains the creation and description of the three essential steps in implementing those principles to education: See it, Name it, and Do it. The remainder of the book is divided into three sections. Part one focuses on instruction and includes information on levers 1-4: data-driven instruction, planning, observation and feedback, as well as professional development. The second part focuses on school culture as it pertains to levers 5-7: student culture, staff culture, and managing school leadership teams. The third and last part of the book focuses on finding the time to implement the seven levers discussed in parts one and two. Throughout the book are special boxes highlighting the “core idea” of the section being read, as well as video and testimonial clips of top-tier leaders in action that correlate with the reading and can be found in the accompanying DVD.

Main Themes

Bambrick-Santoyo’s thesis can be summed up into two main themes: providing information and ideas for exceptional educational success that are (1) practical, and (2) replicable. The author successfully accomplishes both goals with his book through his use of personal stories and anecdotes, functional forms and templates already created and ready to be used, and choice of varied leadership examples artfully infused into every lever and offered via DVD.

Practical

Practical is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas”. While using research studies, journal articles, and other literary resources as background knowledge to guide his writing, Bambrick-Santoyo does not bog down the reading with overly technical terms or an overt emphasis on percentages and numbers as most authors of books on leadership may be tempted to do to show their grasp on the current knowledge and studies in the field. He also does not waste time discussing lofty ideas of what a perfect leader would do, and then focusing on just one or two leaders that have successfully implemented those theories. He has a Notes section at the back of the book with every literary resource used and the important notes from each that he used in case readers want to read those on their own (p367-375). Instead, he chooses to focus on providing the core idea in ways that the reader can internalize and connect with the material. He uses personal stories about watching his father-in-law cook to explain the effectiveness of the three essential steps “see it, name it, do it” (p9). He uses sports analogies about basketball, baseball, and even weightlifting to bring the ideas into perspective. “Weightlifters need sleep – physical rest – for the body to actually build stronger muscles. If weightlifters don’t get enough sleep, it doesn’t matter how much they train – they will not make progress. For learners, that translates to time to think” (p202). His approach to the material feels personal, and the additional video clips provided in the DVD bring home the point that this is achievable.

In alignment with the definition of practical, Bambrick-Santoyo successfully provides the readers not just with the theory and ideas to reach the goal of educational success, but delivers the actual tools that the reader can print out and use right away; like calendar pages, rubrics, and templates for weekly meetings. As the reader goes through the book, they are not just shown examples of what forms that effective leaders use should look like or the information that they suggest be included in forms. Instead, readers are provided the rationale for its effectiveness, given a section within the book for the teacher to write their own personal reflections, and offered their very own copy of said forms on the DVD as well as video clips of leaders or coaches using those exact forms in a way that makes them most effective. “What tools from this book will you use to improve observation and feedback at your school? Check all that you will use (you can find all on the DVD) (p179).

Replicable

The ideas and protocols suggested by Bambrick-Santoyo are specific and intentional but work broadly across all types of schools. This begins with his choice of group leaders selected as examples in the book and for the video clips. “These leaders come from every type of school and every type of location: small and large, city and rural, district ad charter, and everything in between. They hail from Dallas to DC to Denver to Memphis to New York City. They represent school leaders in the broadest sense of the word: they are in roles from principal to coach of principals” (p4). The reader is encouraged to believe that by following the ideas, strategies, and using the tools provided, they too can achieve exceptional educational success in their schools.

While the provided tools on the DVD are one of the keys to making Bambrick-Santoyo’s work practical, it also strengthens the likelihood of its replicability. Readers don’t have to find the time to create the forms suggested within the book or try to master excel spreadsheets on their own to make it fit the data they want. The forms are created and ready to be used. The forms have also been explained and modeled for effectiveness. The book can be read and reread, and the clips can be watched and re-watched, should a reader need guidance or tips on the specific forms being used. There is little room for error as it is so well-explained and demonstrated, making the use of these forms, and the ideas they represent, painless to replicate.

Comparing and Contrasting to Fullan’s Leading in a Culture of Change

At its core, Bambrick-Santoyo’s Leverage Leadership 2.0 (2018) shares many of the same components of Fullan’s Leading in a Culture of Change (2001). While Fullan concentrates on a framework for leadership that focuses on five key components: (1)moral purpose, (2) understanding change, (3) relationship building, (4) knowledge creation and sharing, and (5) coherence making, as “independent but mutual reinforcing forces for positive change” (Fullan, p3), Bambrick-Santoyo incorporates his own framework of “see it, name it, do it” as steps to implement his seven levers of leadership: (1) data-driven instruction, (2) instructional planning, (3) observation and feedback, (4) professional development, (5) student culture, (6) staff culture, (7) managing school leadership teams.

It is interesting to note that Fullan’s five key components can all be found within Bambrick-Santoyo’s seven levers as demonstrated in the table below:

Fullan’s Key Components	Bambrick-Santoyo’s Levers
Moral Purpose	Lever 5. Student Culture Lever 7. Managing School Leadership Teams
Understanding Change	*touched upon lightly within all Levers
Relationship Building	Lever 6. Staff Culture *Lever 5, 7
Knowledge Creation & Sharing	Lever 3. Observation and Feedback Lever 4. Professional Development *Lever 6
Coherence Making	Lever 1. Data-driven Instruction Lever 2. Instructional Planning *Lever 3, 4

Similar to Fullan, Bambrick-Santoyo puts a premium on school culture and data-driven instruction. “If in doubt, data and culture must take priority” (p19). Bambrick-Santoyo also reveals data-driven instruction to be crucial, much like Fullan describes on page 117 of his book, “Focusing on outcomes clarifies for teachers and principals what they are trying to accomplish and drives backward through the process toward moral purpose. It helps schools produce more coherent action plans” (2001). This is exemplified within the first part of the Bambrick-Santoyo’s book from pages 23 to 218, in which he analyzes data-driven instruction, planning, and even professional development that follows the data. “The power of data-driven planning is that it doesn’t just give one teacher the tools to be successful. It builds a community that walks the most efficient possible path to success together” (p120).

While there are many similarities in the concepts and levers of both authors, the difference between both books is primarily on the style of the authors. It begins with the difference in purpose and leads to the differences in examples and practicality. Fullan’s purpose is to help leaders in all industries to become more effective as leaders. Fullan states on page 2 of his book, “I have never been fond of distinguishing between leadership and management” (2001). This is obvious in his choice to focus on not just educational leadership successes, but also success by managing CEOs in big businesses. Many of the examples used by Fullan may sometimes be difficult for an educational leader to implement themselves, making them more idealistic than practical. Bambrick-Santoyo however, concentrates on effective leadership in education, and chooses to emphasize strategies and applications to successfully make it practical and replicable, by providing examples of school leaders from all levels: principals, coaches, instructional leaders, etc. as well as the tools necessary to replicate (templates, rubrics, data charts, video clips on how to use the tools).

At a total of 166 pages, Fullan’s book seems more inviting and readable, but his style which is research heavy and includes many examples of businesses instead of schools, make it a harder read in the long run. Bambrick-Santoyo offers the same components as Fullan, but in a much simpler and practical way, that is more reader-friendly (despite the size of the book!).

Conclusion

Leverage Leadership 2.0 is a second edition of Bambrick-Santoyo’s original book “Leverage Leadership” published in 2012. Perhaps this is why the book feels so well-done and is such an engaging book to read, because it wasn’t written to just get a point out. It was written, used and thought about for years, then using additional experience and feedback, it was improved upon, so that the seven levers make sense and feel easy to replicate. In effect, this book utilized many of the same principles it suggests.

There also aren’t enough words to express how helpful the video clips that are provided are for making this book truly practical and coherent. Much like our students, leaders too learn better by seeing and doing, not just reading about the subject. “If I had not seen Miguel prepare the meal (see the model), I wouldn’t have captured the subtleties that made his preparation magical – and far better than my own (see my gap). Then I needed to write down those steps (name it), and finally I needed to do it myself (do it)” (p9). Bambrick-Santoyo leaves readers with the ideas and the tools so they too can “do it”!

References

Bambrick-Santoyo, Paul. Leverage Leadership 2.0: A Practical Guide to Building Exceptional Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2018.

Fullan, Michael. Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.

Practical. (2020). In Oxford English dictionary online (2^nd ed.), Retrieved from https://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=E211US885G0&p=define+practical

To top

---

---

---

Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET 

* Exceptional Student Education, Teacher – Responsible for the educational leadership of students placed in exceptional education programs, including gifted students and students with disabilities.  This position encompasses the three standards included in Teacher Professional Expectations in School Board Policy, which are high student achievement, safe learning environment, and effective and efficient operations.  To learn more – Click here

* Academic Resource Center Math Specialist/Teacher – Academic Resource Center (ARC) Mathematics Specialist/Teacher is a teacher leader who is responsible for supporting effective Grade 9 through 12 mathematics instruction and student learning with a particular focus on students with service plans and exceptional needs. To learn more – Click here

* Diverse Learner Teacher – We are seeking experienced full-time Diverse Learner Teachers (K-8 Grades) to join CICS Avalon, CICS Basil, and CICS Washington Park Campuses for the 2020-2021 school year. A Diverse Learner Teacher holds primary responsibility for providing academic, emotional, and physical services for students who require additional support to thrive within the school’s core academic program. To learn more – Click here

* Special Education Teacher – We are looking for highly motivated and skilled Special Education teachers to join our team at District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS). DCPS serves more than 51,000 students through the e?orts of approximately 4,000 educators in 117 schools. DCPS intends to have the highest-performing, best paid, most satis?ed, and most honored educator force in the nation and a distinctive central o?ce sta? whose work supports and drives instructional excellence and signi?cant achievement gains for DCPS students. To learn more- Click here

* Special Education Teacher – $60,000/school year (185 days), summers off with year round pay and year round appreciation.  Special Education Teachers needed in Arizona (Phoenix and surrounding cities). Needs are in the self-contained and resource settings serving students with emotional disabilities (ED), Autism (A), Severe/Profound (S/P), and Intellectual Disabilities (ID).  STARS is the largest school contract agency in AZ. STARS is owned and operated by Occupational Therapists. To learn more – Click here

* Special Education Teacher – The Special Education Teacher provides individual, small group, and whole-group instruction. Monitors student progress in the school environment including academic achievement and behaviors. Maintains a safe and orderly environment, which may include monitoring specific health concerns of students in the classroom and teaches social skills. To learn more – Click here

* Special Education Teacher – Environmental Charter Schools is seeking a talented and dynamic Special Education Teacher who is passionate about preparing low-income students of color for college success. The mission of the Environmental Charter Schools (ECS) is to reimagine public education in low-income communities of color to prepare conscious, critical thinkers who are equipped to graduate from college and create a more equitable and sustainable world. To learn more – Click here

* Teacher-Special Education – Tacoma Public Schools is looking for exceptional special education professionals ready to inspire and make a positive impact on students. Our special education program serves approximately 4,000 students from preschool through high school; serving ages three to twenty-one. Specially designed instruction and related services are based upon the need of each student. To learn more – Click here

To top

Acknowledgements

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

• Center for Parent Information and Resources
• Committee on Education and the Workforce
• FirstGov.gov-The Official U.S. Government Web Portal
• Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals (JAASEP)
• National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth
• 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 Health and Human Services
• U.S. Department of Labor
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration
• U.S. Office of Special Education

The National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET) thanks all of the above for the information provided for this or prior editions of the Special Educator e-Journal

---

To top

Download a PDF Version of This e-Journal

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

To top