writing effective and legally -defensible ieps: core...

Writing Effective and Legally-Defensible IEPs: Core RequirementsWhat teachers need to know about the most essential elements in the

Individualized Educational Program

SWEET, STEVENS, KATZ & WILLIAMS LLPAugust 2006

© Sweet, Stevens, Katz & Williams LLP 2006

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) requires that every IEP contain the following essential elements:

1. A “statement of the child’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance,” including an explanation of “how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general education curriculum.”

2. A “statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional goals” that are designed to “meet the child’s needs that result from the disability to enable the child to be involved … and make progress in the general education curriculum” and to address “other educational needs.” For children who are eligible for alternative assessment (PASA), the annual goals must also include short-term objectives or benchmarks.

3. A “statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided to the child,” including projected beginning datesfor, and the anticipated “frequency, duration, and location” of, each program or service thus described. These programs and services must serve the purposes of (a) advancing the child toward the attainment of his or her annual goals; (b) enabling the child to participate and make progress in the general education curriculum; (c) enabling the child to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; (d) enabling the child to receive education and participate with both disabled and nondisabled children in activities that advance these purposes.

4. An “explanation of the extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with nondisabled children in the regularclass” and in regular extracurricular and non academic activities.

5. For children aged sixteen and older, “appropriate measurable postsecondary goals based on age-appropriate transition assessments” that address “training, education, employment, and where appropriate, independent living skills.”

Writing Effective and Legally-Defensible IEPs: Core Requirements


The statement of these measurable postsecondary goals must be accompanied by a statement of “the transition services (including courses of study) needed to assist the child in reaching these goals.”

These elements are not the only IEP content requirements that the IDEA imposes. They are, however, most critical to the development of an IEP that will meet the needs of the student, communicate effectively with the parents our plans for their children, and survive legal scrutiny. Writing IEPs that describe each of these elements clearly, specifically, and measurably falls well within the legal and professional duties of special education teachers. Designing or using publisher-made assessment tools to measure progress regularly and make such adjustments in goals and programs and services as the progress data require also falls within the scope of such duties.

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide you with specific guidance and information about each of the above IEP elements, and about progress monitoring, so that you are able to meet your responsibilities as a professional employee of this District. Although the IEP elements discussed in this memorandum are most important to the development of a legally and educationally sound IEP, you are expected to ensure that all of the required elements of the IEP are completed thoroughly and in a manner that is appropriate to the individual needs of the child.

A. Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance

The statement of present levels must contain objectively measurable baseline statements in every area of disability-based need, academic and functional, of which you are aware. Every area of need must have a baseline regardless of whether the particular need was identified or recognized in the most recent evaluation report or reevaluation report.

Example. The last ER for Sal, a student with a learning disability, describes him as having difficulties with attention and short-term memory that are adversely affecting the acquisition of reading skills. Teachers working with Sal notice that these same attention and memory difficulties are now affecting Sal’s ability to master and retain basic math facts. The present levels for Sal should include baselines for both reading skill and math fact skill development, and include goals addressing each area.

Example. The most recent ER for Jake identifies him as having a language based learning disability that affects that level and rate at which he acquires reading and written language skills and that impairs his ability to retrieve language when asked to respond to questions orally. Teachers working with Jake notice that these difficulties are causing Jake to frustrate when presented with reading, writing, and language tasks and to engage in behaviors that enable him to avoid such tasks, either by disrupting the class or by earning a disciplinary referral to the office, or both. The IEP



for Jake should include baselines for reading, written language, expressive language, and the observed behaviors that are interfering with Jake’s learning or the learning of others.

Academic Achievement

Academic achievement is confined to the areas of reading, math, written language, and listening comprehension. In academic areas, the statement of present levels must describe specifically and quantifiably the skills that the child has exhibited, either in response to instruction or in response to assessments that provide instructional baselines. An unfamiliar teacher, reading the statement for a particular academic area, should be able to identify the point at which he or she should begin instruction in that area and type and level of materials he or she should use. The statement also, whenever possible, should provide the teacher with an approximate rate at which the student learns and retains new material.

Reading. In the area of Reading, the present level statement must include baseline information, when relevant to the reading level of the child, in all five areas of reading development recognized in the Report of the National Reading Panel, NIH Pub. No. 00-4754 (National Institute for Literacy 2000): phonological awareness, phonics or “alphabetics,” fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.

Examples.

J Good. Mary is able to discriminate and vocalize all of the regular English phonemes, can segment and blend these phonemes into words. She is able to read aloud passages written at the beginning third grade level at an average, over her most recent ten readings, of 96% accuracy at 80 words per minute (“wpm”). This year, because of difficulties with attention and short-term memory, Mary has mastered 2/3 of the reading skill lessons at level two of a structured, sequential reading program in which children are expected to master one level for each year of instruction. With review of unfamiliar vocabulary prior to reading, and with prompting to apply learned pre-reading, reading, and post-reading strategies, she can answer mixed concrete-factual and analytical-inferential comprehension questions about a passage she has just read at the mid-third grade level with 80 percent accuracy, averaged over her last ten readings, although she answers concrete-factual questions in isolation with 96% accuracy. Retention of material read falls to 50% on re-assessment of comprehension within 24 hours of the initial assessment.

J Good. Ted is able to apply previously-learned phonics and word analysis skills to read passages written at the lower high school level with 94% accuracy at 160 words per minute, averaged



over the most recent five cold readings. With pre-teaching of new vocabulary, he is able to answer mixed concrete and inferential comprehension questions about passages he has just read at the upper middle school level with 90% accuracy and lower high school level passages with 75% accuracy, averaged over the most recent four cold readings. On reassessment within one week of the initial assessment, comprehension falls to 80% for upper middle school passages and 68% for lower high school level passages. Overall, Ted’s fluency and comprehension levels have grown approximately one year for each year of structure, systematic, direct reading instruction.

M Bad. Harriet participates in the Harcourt Trophies Reading Program, and her teacher reports that she is doing well at the second grade level. She tends to do better with books about horses. She earned a B- in Language Arts in the fourth quarter. Content area teachers report that Harriet appears to understand material from the text that the class reads together, although she is reluctant to read aloud when called upon and works slower on independent assignments that require reading. She scored in the “basic” range on the most recent administration of the PSSA Reading test.

M Bad. Jack’s most recent testing in the area of reading on the KTEA yielded the following results:

Reading Decoding ss 85 GE 4.3

Reading Comp. ss 92 GE 6.1

Reading Composite ss 89 GE 5.4

In addition to reading instruction in the LS Resource Room, Jack receives instruction from the Title I Reading Teacher, who reports that Jack is doing well and completed all of the units in Level 3 of phonics and spelling program.

Math. In the area of Math, the present level statement must describe, when relevant to the Math level of the child, the extent to which the child is accurate and fluent with the basic operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) and number systems (whole numbers, simple and mixed fractions, and decimals).

Examples.

J Good. Jim can add up to three digit numbers, with regrouping,at a rate of 65 digits correct per minute, and with 85% problem-solving accuracy, averaged over the most recent 4 timed probes. He can subtract up to three digit numbers, with regrouping, at a



rate of 42 digits correct per minute, with 75% problem solving accuracy, averaged over the most recent 4 timed probes. He is automatic with multiplication facts to seven and is accurate, but not automatic, with facts to ten. Given his need for frequent repetition and practice to attain fluency, his rate of new skill acquisition and retention is approximately half that of a nondisabled peer. Jim can solve two step word problems that are read to him and that involve addition or subtraction, or both, with 85% accuracy averaged over the most recent 5 assessments.

M Bad. Gertie earned scores of 92 in Math Calculation and 73 in Math Application on the March 2006 administration of the KeyMath Test. He is currently working at grade 2 of the Saxon Math program. She scored “below basic” on the fifth grade PSSA in Math.

Written language. In the area of writing, the present level statement must describe typical writing that the child has produced in terms of objectively observable elements, depending on the level of the child: letter formation, word writing accuracy and fluency, spelling, sentence structure (capitalization, subject and predicate, punctuation), grammar and usage, paragraph structure (topic sentence, supporting detail sentences, transition sentences, indentation), word variation (active verbs, adverbs, adjectives), sentence variation (simple sentences, compound sentences, combinations), vocabulary, elaboration (amount of detail or explanation of ideas, topics, or themes), and coherence or “topic focus” (extent to which supporting sentences in each paragraph support the topic sentence and paragraph topics support the overall theme of the paper). The present statement should also describe whether and to what extent the child is able to follow a learned writing process.

Examples.

J Good. Todd can legibly print his name and five three-letter words (“dog,” “cat,” “mom,” “dad,” and “car”), using upper and lower case letters as appropriate, within one-inch lines. He can copy three word sentences legibly but without punctuation and numbers to 10, with the exception of 8, within one-inch lines.

J Good. With verbal prompting at each step, and using a graphic organizer, Suzy can follow a writing process to composefive paragraph expository, narrative, and persuasive writings, each consisting of four to five paragraphs. Each paragraph has a topic sentence that relates to the theme of the piece and is supported by three to four detail sentences that expand upon the topic sentence. Suzy rarely uses transitions. Sentences are simple in structure, beginning with a capital letter and ending with a period. Other forms of punctuation are not used. With prompting, Suzy will vary word choice and use adverbs and adjectives, although the level of vocabulary is generally consistent with a third grade level of



writing. Supporting sentences rarely convey more than one detail or idea each. Spelling is phonetic, and 25% of non-sight words are spelled incorrectly, on average over the last three writing samples assessed.

M Bad. Randall’s most recent writing earned a score of “2” overall on the PSSA Written Language Rubric. His Score on the WIAT-II Written Language subtest was 88, GE 3.4.

Listening comprehension. The other area of academic skill development that often needs to be addressed in the present levels statement is listening comprehension, the ability of the child to comprehend spoken information without reading. Because many children can comprehend at levels significantly above their reading levels, understanding the level at which the child comprehends the spoken word can be critical to the design of accommodations, such as books on tape and use of reading software, that will allow the child greater access to the general curriculum. Listening comprehension can be assessed by using leveled passages from norm-referenced, criterion-referenced, or curriculum-based assessments of reading comprehension. Rather than have the child read the passages and answer the given comprehension questions, the examiner reads the passages to the child and asks the questions. The examiner should begin with the child’s independent reading level and move upward from that point to the level at which the child’s responses to comprehension questions falls below the instructional level.

What to avoid. A statement of present levels of academic performance need not include the following:

å Information about achievement or performance in content areas and specials. A child cannot have a disability in Science or Social Studies. Poor performance in these areas is the result of disabilities affecting academic achievement, such as reading or written language, or functional performance, such as expressive language, learning-related behavior, attention, organization, or motor planning. Knowing that the child received a “D” in Social Studies last quarter, or that the reason for that grade was “failure to turn in homework and long-term assignments” or “poor test scores” does little to assist in the design of instruction or adaptations and program modifications for the child, which is the purpose of the present levels.

ç Qualitative statements. Avoid phrases such as “made progress in,” “showed improvement with,” “did well in,” “met expectations,” “was much better,” “showed growth in,” “struggled with,” “improved,” “made gains,” “continued to improve,” and the hundreds of others that fail to quantify present performance or the rate of acquisition and retention of new learning.

é Information about the classes in which the student participated over the past year. The reader can learn from other sources that the child received Math instruction in the resource room; had Science, Social Studies, and Music in the regular classroom; and participated in the Title I program for Reading and Writing. These are not present levels.



è Personal information about the child that does not relate directly to instruction. The purpose of the present levels is not to enable future teachers and other staff “to get to know the child as a person.” Avoid bromides such as “has a great sense of humor,” “enjoys boy scouts,” “participates in many activities in the community with her family,” “loves trains and other vehicles,” and “is a pleasure to have in class.” This information might be vaguely relevant to instruction, but not enough, usually, to warrant placement in present levels.

Functional Performance.

The statement of functional performance encompasses, potentially, a vast array of areas, unlike academic achievement. These areas include learning-interfering behavior, expressive and receptive language, social skills, pragmatic language, fine and gross motor skills, study and organizational skills, hearing and vision, and many others. In all areas of disability-related performance deficit, the present level statement must describe the problem in terms of specific, observable, measurable behaviors. The statement must answer the questions “what does the behavior look or sound like?” and “under what conditions or when does the behavior occur?”When the child is cognitively capable of providing information about his or her thought process related to the observed behavior, such information should also be included.

Examples.

Organization.

J Good. Harold cannot begin an assignment, in or out of class, that consists of more than two steps unless the assignment is broken down into single steps or clusters of very closely related steps. At the beginning of each step, the teachers must ensure comprehension by requiring Harold to repeat the directions or to state exactly what the outcome will be. Task completion must be assessed at the completion of each step or cluster of steps before introducing and providing directions for the next step or cluster of steps. Harold indicates that when tasks require multiple steps, he cannot remember what the end of the task is or what he needs to do first.

M Bad. Harold struggles with the independent completion of long-term assignments.

Attention.

J Good. On three observations conducted at different times of the day, on different days, and during different subjects, Rene exhibited the following off-task behaviors: staring out the window, staring and picking at her fingernails or small objects on her desk, putting her head down on the desk and fidgeting with objects, and



reading materials in her desk unrelated to the instruction. Such behavior would persist until the activity changed or the teacher provided redirection to Rene specifically. The intensity of redirection required to return Rene to task would vary depending on the duration that she was off task before the redirection. For off task behavior of relatively short duration, a verbal prompt consisting of stating her name or quietly asking her to pay attention would suffice; for off task behavior of longer duration, verbal prompting would have to be repeated two to three times or accompanied by physical proximity or a light tap on Rene’s desk. Total times off task, compared to a bench-marked peer, for each observation were as follows:

Lang. Arts Mon. 8:00-8:50 A.M. Rene: 56%; peer: 15%

Math Wed. 1:00-1:50 P.M. Rene: 48%; peer: 10%

Soc. St. Thur. 9:00-9:50 A.M. Rene: 62%; peer: 18%

When the teachers during these observations would ask questions of Rene following incidents of off-task behavior, she was either unable to answer or answered in a manner that demonstrated lack of comprehension of the preceding discussion or activity on 4 of 5 probes. Rene reports that she knows when she is off task but is unable to describe correctly the types of behavior she exhibits when off task or the types of activity that causes her to lose attention.

M Bad. Bart is frequently inattentive and requires verbal and occasionally paired verbal and visual redirection to return to task. Teachers feel that his inattention is adversely affecting academic performance.

Learning-interfering behavior. The present level statement must include a measurable baseline statement of any behavior that disrupts either the learning of the child or the learning of others. Behaviors that require attention in the IEP can range from the relatively benign, such as inattention or withdrawal, to overtly disruptive, such as clowning or crying, to threatening, such as verbal or physical aggression. The obligation to address learning-interfering behaviors applies to all children with disabilities who demonstrate such behaviors, regardless of their disability. A child with a learning disability, for example, who demonstrates inattention or hyperactivity, or begins to act out to avoid stressful academic tasks, requires a behavioral baseline statement, a behavioral goal or goals, and appropriate specially-designed instruction and related services in his or her IEP even though nothing in the education record of that child supports that he or she has an emotional disturbance or other disability commonly associated with such behaviors.

The present level statement should describe learning-interfering behavior by answering the following questions:



ü What type of behavior does the child demonstrate? Rather than describe individual behavior incidents, describe behaviors by category, such as inattentive, off-task (e.g., fidgety, playing with non-instructional materials, talking, distracted by stimuli not related to instruction, frequent touching of objects or other persons), hyperactive, self-stimulatory (e.g., sub-vocalizing, rubbing eyes or body parts, putting objects in mouth, repetitive movement), clowning or joking, verbally aggressive, or physically aggressive. Avoid judgment words, such as “deliberately,” “intentionally,” “threatening,” and “menacing,” when describing behavior by type. Remember that you aredescribing behavior objectively, not trying to convince the reader to accept your perspective or to react to the behavior.

ü Approximately how frequently does this behavior occur in the school setting and what is the approximate duration of a typical occurrence? Describe on average, or approximately, how often you and others see the behavior over a specified time: class period, day, week, month, quarter. When possible, for each type of behavior described, describe how long each incident or episode of that behavior occurs. You can describe the duration of a behavior either by providing an estimated time that each episode or incident lasts (e.g., “each incident lasts approximately two minutes on average”) or by describing the circumstances under which it ends(e.g., “continues until he is verbally redirected,” “continues until he gets the attention of the teacher or assistant,” “persists until she has worn herself out,” or “lasts until the activity changes”), or both. Another important dimension in describing behavior, when possible, is latency. “Latency” means the time required for a child to cease the learning-interfering behavior after being prompted or redirected to do so, or the number and intensity of prompts required to stop such behavior.

ü What is happening or has just happened when, or what are the circumstances under which, the behavior typically occurs? Determine and describe in the present level statement whether the behavior occurs during particular activities, at particular times of day, in response to particular people, in response to particular task demands or types or styles of redirection, in response to the level of structure provided for an activity or task, or in response to the duration of an activity or task. The point is to identify the circumstances or conditions in the school environment, if any, that might have a causal relationship with the behavior.



ü What is the perceived function of the behavior? One of the main purposes in answering the foregoing questions is to develop a hypothesis, or “best guess,” about the function or purpose that the behavior is serving for the child. Again, the law requires that we suspend judgment (the child is “just bad” or has “poor parents”) and assume that (1) the behavior is serving a legitimate function or purpose; and (2) we can teach the child a replacement behavior, or better way, to serve that function or accomplish that purpose. The most common function of behaviors are avoidance of disfavored tasks or activities; seeking attentionfrom peers or adults; self stimulation or regulation of the sensory system; and communication of frustration, anger, or anxiety. Although determining a function or purpose of a particular behavior is difficult and requires speculation, albeit informed speculation, it is critical to the development of measurable annual goals and specially-designed instruction that will enable us to teach a replacement behavior. The replacement behavior will serve the same function or accomplish the same purpose for the child in a more socially-appropriate manner. Some behaviors, such as inattention caused by an attention deficit disorder, or some involuntary tics caused by Tourette’s Syndrome, do not serve any function or purpose that can be addressed by teaching a replacement behavior. In those cases of biological causation, the present level statement should identify the neurological or nervous-system cause of the behavior.

ü What, if anything, does the child think about his or her behavior? If the child has the cognitive and communication skills and the maturity necessary to provide the required information, the present levels should describe whether the child (1) can label the feelings that accompany observed behaviors; (2) can describe the thoughts that accompany those behaviors; (3) can identify the conditions and circumstances under which the behaviors arise; (4) accurately perceives such conditions or circumstances; (5) can accurately describe the effect of his behavior on him- or herself and on others. This information, if available, will enable us to teach self awareness that will ultimately enable us to teach self monitoring, so that the child eventually will be able to get ahead of the inappropriate behavior and, when possible, apply a replacement behavior.

A teacher, who sees the child in one environment and who lacks the skills of a psychologist or behavior specialist, might not be able to gather all of the information required to answer these questions. Others might have to participate, either by providing specific information that answers the questions or by conducting interviews and observations of the child themselves. The



teacher must know what information is needed and take the steps, sufficiently in advance of the IEP team meeting or revision, to get that information from the staff who can provide it.

Examples.

Learning-related behavior.

J Good. Ron demonstrates an average of five episodes of clowning and talking-out behavior in class each week. They occur most often at the beginning of Algebra class, where he has struggled to grasp concepts over the past quarter.Clowning and talking behaviors persist until he is verbally redirected, typically requiring 2 to 3 such prompts delivered after the teacher has established close proximity to Ron and is in Ron’s line of sight. Typical episodes of clowning and talking-out, with redirection, last 2 to 3 minutes. These behaviors appear to serve the function of avoiding instruction that he is finding increasingly difficult. Ron recognizes that his clowning and talking-out at the beginning of class disrupts instruction, and he admits that Algebra is getting difficult. He admits that he feels anxious when he enters Algebra class most days, but denies that his clowning and talking-out are related to his anxious feelings, claiming instead that he is a “class clown” and that other kids like his “joking around” despite signs of annoyance evident in both the teacher and most of the students during observed episodes.

Once a week, on average, Ron demonstrates verbal aggression toward the Math teacher when he is redirected (“bug off” “quit picking on me, man”). These incidents usually occur either on days scheduled for a test of quiz or days when he has not completed a homework assignment. Such incidents typically last approximately 3 to 4 seconds, although on 4 of the most recent 5 incidents, the teacher sent Ron to the office immediately following the verbal outburst. Ron complied without protest on each such occasion. These behaviors appear also to serve the purpose of avoidance. Ron admits that he feels especially anxious on days when tests of quizzes are scheduled in Algebra or when he knows he has not completed an assignment. Again, however, he denies that his verbal aggression is related to these feelings, contending instead that his actions are the result of the teacher treating him “like a marked man.” He admits, however, that he could chose a better way to respond, but could not identify any alternatives.

M Bad. Ron seems to enjoy his role as the “class clown.” He frequently disrupts class with jokes and social chatter and requires multiple reminders to get on task. Recent examples include entering class and loudly accosting female students by saying “Hey, baby, I like your bling” and standing on a stool to perform a rap he called “Algebra sucks.” Often, when told to stop, Ron deliberately and defiantly lashes out at the teacher, recently telling him to “bug off” and “quit picking on me, man.” Other students have become increasingly angry with these constant disruptions and Ron’s deliberate disregard for the teacher and the class. Phone calls have been made to Ron’s mother after each incident, as requested. Mother indicates that she has taken Ron off medication and will not try it again because



the drugs “make him feel funny.” Ron is often unprepared for class, although he has been seen out in the community many nights past 10:00.

A special word about the explanation of “how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general education curriculum.”

This explanation is a critical link between the present levels of academic and functional performance that precede it and the goals and the specially designed instruction that follow. Remember that the “general curriculum” refers to the scope and sequence of skills and content instruction as it appears in the planned courses of instruction for each grade level. The disability can affect involvement and progress in the general curriculum in any one or more of the following four ways, from least to most “restrictive”—

1. Not at all. A child might be able to access parts of the general curriculum without adaptations, modifications, or replacement instruction (remember, however, that if the child is able to access all of the general curriculum without any of these supports, he or she would not require “specially-designed instruction” and would therefore not qualify as a “child with a disability.” Example: “Mary can participate and make progress in the general curriculum in Art, Music, and Science without adaptations, modifications, or replacement instruction.”

2. Adaptations needed, in the regular or special education environment. “Adaptations” are individualized changes to (a) the method, means, or intensity of instruction; (b) the texts or other materials or equipment; (c) the number, use, or qualifications of instructional or support staff; (d) the type or timing of assessments; (e) the time allotted for instruction; or (f) the instructional environment. The distinguishing feature of adaptations is that, however significantly they might change the conditions of learning and assessment for the child in a particular subject, that child is nevertheless expected to learn the skills or acquire the content knowledge identified as learning outcomes in the planned course of instruction for the particular area of the curriculum. Adaptations can consist of the common and the uncommon, including books on tape, texts with lower reading levels, use of dictation rather than writing, changes in testing format, extended time for testing, supplemental instruction or tutoring, extended time for testing or task completion, assistive technology, implementation of individualized behavior interventions, use of individualized prompting and cueing, study guides, one-on-one aide support, sign language interpreters, and placement in an alternative setting for instruction or testing or both. If the need for environmental modifications requires that the child receive instruction in a special education classroom or other alternative setting, such placement is considered an “adaptation,” as long as the general curriculum learning outcomes are the same. Example: “Jake will require multiple adaptations, as described in the ‘specially-designed instruction and program modifications’ section of this IEP, to participate and make progress in the general curriculum.”

-continued-



The explanation of “how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general education curriculum,” continued.

3. Modifications needed, in the regular or special education environment. Modifications consist of the elimination of some or all of the learning outcomes identified in the planned course of instruction for that particular subject in the general curriculum. They often work in tandem with adaptations, as when, for example, the child requires such intensive repetition a practice that he or she cannot acquire the entire scope and sequence of the general curriculum in one school year. Modifications also work in tandem with replacement instruction, as when the child requires basic academic functional skills instruction of such scope that the time required necessarily supplants instructional time that would otherwise be available for delivery of general curriculum. Examples: “Given the level of repetition and practice required for Hortense to master the learning outcomes of the general curriculum, she will require modification of that curriculum to eliminate outcomes that are less relevant for her, as described in the ‘specially-designed instruction and program modifications’ section of this IEP.” “Because Robert can comprehend and retain only concrete and factual information, he will require modification of he general curriculum to eliminate those outcomes requiring higher-level application and analysis, as described in the ‘specially-designed instruction and program modifications’ section of this IEP.”

4. Replacement instruction needed, in the regular or special education environment. Many children with disabilities, of course, require direct instruction in some area or areas of basic academic skill (reading, writing, math) or functional performance (language, social skills, replacement behaviors) that are not part of the scope and sequence of the general curriculum at the child’s current grade level. Such instruction, whether it occurs in a regular classroom or in a special education setting, “replaces,” and thus usually supplants, general curriculum for the child. Example: “Tyler requires direct instruction in reading, basic math calculation, and social skills that are not part of the general curriculum at his current grade level, and the time required for such instruction will supplant time during which he would otherwise participate in the general curriculum.”

The explanation of “how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general education curriculum” will sometimes require brief statements, of the sort modeled above, covering all four, or some other combination, of the foregoing scenarios. All needed adaptations and modifications must translate into items of “specially-designed instruction and program modification” in that section of the IEP. All replacement instruction must translate into goals and, when appropriate, objectives in that section of the IEP.



B. Goals and, when Necessary, Short-term Objectives or Benchmarks.

When a child with a disability requires replacement instruction, the annual outcome of such instruction must be described as one or more measurable annual goals. The IEP must contain at least one measurable annual goal for each area of replacement instruction provided to the child. The annual goal informs the reader of an objectively verifiable end-point for a year of instruction in a particular area that might have consisted of instruction in hundreds skills necessary to the attainment of that end. The endpoint can be expressed numerically (e.g., grade level, age equivalency, level within a specialized program or curriculum, rubric score tied to objective criteria), or in terms of a product (e.g., writing consisting of specifically-described elements) or an observable behavior (e.g., sustaining conversations with peers, following multi-step directions, completing tasks within time parameters, applying learned pro-social responses to self-monitored feelings). To determine the annual end-point, the IEP team must have some means of estimating the child’s expected rate of acquisition. This rate can be estimated by comparing the time the child actually required to learn specificskills or content to the time expected of a child of similar age and grade level, when exposed to appropriate instruction; or by comparing the actual level of achievement of the child, after exposure to appropriate instruction, to his or her chronological age or grade level.

For the relatively small proportion of children with disabilities who qualify for alternative assessment—in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Alternative System of Assessment (“PASA”)—each annual goal must include short-term objectives or benchmarks that measurably describe smaller increments of learning the acquisition of which demonstrate progress toward the annual goal. Objectives describe smaller outcomes that provide a valid, but selective, set of indicators of progress toward the attainment of the annual goal. They are “selective” in that they are not a comprehensive enumeration of every skill or item of content that the child will learn. Their purpose is to offer the IEP team a child-specific means of measuring Although short-term objectives or benchmarks are not required for most children with disabilities, the IEP team has the option of using them if it deems them necessary to describe progress in an objective and measurable manner.

Replacement instruction is planned special education in either basic academic skills (reading, math, writing) or functional skills (listening comprehension, expressive language, social and emotional, learning-related behavior, motor, self-help, and study and organizational) that are not taught as part of the scope and sequence of the general curriculum at the child’s current grade level. Instruction that addresses grade level skill or content learning outcomes—even though those outcomes might be significantly reduced in number or simplified, and even though the texts and materials used to teach those outcomes might differ significantly from those used to teach the same outcomes in regular education or higher-level classes—is not replacement instruction and need not have an annual goal associated with it in the IEP.



A well-written goal or objective consists of three components: (1) an operant condition, which describes the conditions of instruction or assessment, or both, in which a particular response will be observed or measured; (2) a measurable response to that condition or set of conditions, which clearly and objectively describes how the child will respond to the condition; and (3) a criterion or criteria for determining whether the response was sufficient to determine the goal or objective mastered. For example, the following measurable annual goal—

Given controlled passages at the third grade level, John will apply learned decoding and word analysis strategies to read aloud 120 words per minute with 94 % accuracy, and given non-controlled passages at the third grade level, John will apply learned decoding and word analysis strategies to read aloud 100 words per minute with 90 % accuracy

can be diagrammed as follows—

These elements do not have to appear in any particular order. Operant conditions can be described after the measurable response; criteria can be intermingled within the description of the measurable response or the operant condition. The object is to write a coherent English sentence that contains these elements. For example, the following measurable annual goal—

In response to one-on-one or small group role play and practice activities, and then in ordinary school settings with facilitation faded to elimination, Ron will respond to activities and circumstances that he has previously verbally identified as causing anxiety and frustration by selecting and applying one of a repertoire of three learned pro-social strategies that he has selected from a given field of choices

Can be diagrammed as follows—

Operant Condition 1: Given controlled passages at the third grade level,

Measurable response 1: John will apply learned decoding and word analysis strategies to read aloud Criteria 1: 120 words per

minute with 94 % accuracy,

Operant Condition 2: and given non-controlled passages at the third grade level,

Measurable response 2: John will apply learned decoding and word analysis strategies to read aloud

Criteria 2: 100 words per minute with 90 % accuracy



Both of these examples contain two operant conditions. The first example establishes different criteria for each condition. While the use of more than one operant condition, measurable response, or criterion is not required, the use of multiple conditions in these examples helps to clarify for the reader the difference between highly-structured learning conditions, in which new skills are often introduced and developed, and more natural conditions. Parents and some independent evaluators are often confused by teacher-generated documentation establishing that a child can meet criteria for a particular measurable response—reading a passage orally at a particular grade level, for example—when the child cannot read at that level outside the classroom. The reading goal diagrammed above, for example, establishes conditions under which the child will read a controlled passage—one specifically targeted to word and syllable types that the child has learned and mastered—and a non-controlled passage—one that might contain unfamiliar word and syllable types. By establishing higher criteria for the controlled passage (“120 words per minute with 94 % accuracy”) and lower criteria for the non-controlled passage (“100 words per minute with 90 % accuracy”), the IEP team lets the reader know that it expects a higher level of performance when structure is provided than when it is not. The parent reading with her child at home thus has a better understanding of what to expect.

The use of multiple operant conditions, responses thereto, and criteria also provides the IEP team with a more refined measure of progress. The team can determine not only whether the child has mastered a particular skill under structured conditions but also how well the child is able to transfer those skills to less structured conditions. The IEP team thus measures skill mastery and independence, an important outcome.

The second goal diagrammed above also demonstrates that measurability in an annual goal does not necessarily sacrifice instructional flexibility. The measurable response is that the

Operant Condition 1: In response to one-on-one or small group role play and practice activities, Operant Condition 2: and

then in ordinary school settings with facilitation faded to elimination,

Measurable response: Ron will respond to activities and circumstances that he has previously verbally identified as causing anxiety and frustration by applying … a … learned pro-social strateg[y] that he has selected from a given field of choices

Criterion: one of a repertoire of three learned pro-social strategies



child will apply “one of three learned prosocial strategies.” The goal does not identify the “learned strategies” but it does commit the school district to teaching three of them to the point that the child can select and apply one when he would otherwise engage in inappropriate behavior. The counselor, psychologist, or emotional support teacher thus has the flexibility to work with the child to identify strategies with which the child is comfortable and that are suited to the setting and the circumstances in which they will be applied.

The following are examples of other annual goals in particular areas:

Phonological Awareness

In response to a verbal and visual model faded to a single verbal prompt, and using a mirror as visual support faded to elimination, Walt will segment and blend all sounds of the phonemic alphabet in the beginning, medial, and ending positions in ten out of ten consecutive trials for each phoneme.

Phonics and Fluency

Given controlled passages at the third grade level, John will apply learned decoding and word analysis strategies to read orally120 words per minute with 94 % accuracy.

Given a list of primer level words from mixed word families, Susan will read orally 50 words per minute with 92% accuracy.

Within two seconds of flash presentation of each of twenty words per assessment, Hank will orally read all of the 200 words from a publisher-made fourth grade high-frequency word list with 100 % accuracy.

Comprehension

Given text and literature passages at the third grade level, with preview of unfamiliar vocabulary words, John will apply learned pre-reading, reading, and post-reading strategies to answer literal questions about the passage with 90 % accuracy and inferential or analytical questions about the passage with 80 % accuracy.



Vocabulary

Given unfamiliar words derived from his eighth grade social studies, science, and literature texts, Kevin will accurately read in isolation and verbally define 10 out of 10 new words weekly.

Expressive Language

In response to explicit instruction in vocabulary development and word retrieval strategies, and with one-on-one practice and rehearsal and using her own note cards, Deanna will deliver a five minute oral presentation to her social studies class on a topic of her choice consisting of a clear statement of the topic; at least seven facts or anecdotes that illustrate or expand upon her topic; and an opinion about her topic that is supported by the facts or anecdotes that she has presented.

Pragmatic Language

In response to rehearsal of social language scripts and the use of social stories, Jimmy will initiate a conversation with a peer on a topic of interest to him and will sustain the conversation across two exchanges, in four consecutive trials during therapy sessions and in three of four consecutive facilitated interactions in the classroom or on the playground.

Learning-Related Behavior

In response to a discrete visual cue that she has agreed to use with the teacher in each of her classes, paired with a verbal prompt faded to the lowest level necessary to elicit the desired response, Sarah will identify her current source of distraction by placing a checkmark next to the appropriate item on a pre-made checklist of activities or circumstances that Sarah has previously identified as causing off task behavior, and she will demonstrate on-task behavior (eyes and head oriented toward the locus of instruction, text or workbook on appropriate page, directions followed) for the remainder of the activity then underway, up to 15 minutes.

Written Language

Tameka will write narrative, persuasive, and research papers consisting of five paragraphs, each containing a topic sentence that relates to the theme of the paper,at least three supporting or illustrative sentences, and a concluding or transition sentence when needed, with variation of sentence structure and correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

C. Specially-Designed Instruction and Program Modifications



The “Specially-Designed Instruction and Program Modifications” section of the IEP describes the type of replacement instruction, adaptations, and modifications the child needs and will receive. Each item of specially-designed instruction must be—

1. Based on the individual needs of the student, not on “the program” as it exists in a particular building or classroom and not on every passing notion of what might “benefit” the child. Child-specific need is the critical factor for determining the items that are included in this section.

2. Based on “peer-reviewed research, to the extent practicable.” Although identifying support for every adaptation and modification in a published, peer-reviewed journal is not “practicable,” the selection of reading, written language, math, and social skills programs from publishers and suppliers that can offer research support for their product is both practicable and necessary. Only when research-supported programs are not working after trial, or are demonstrably inappropriate for the individual child, can the IEP team safely include a child-specific approach that does not have research support.

The following rules apply to the drafting of specially-designed instruction and program modifications:

Rule 1: Be specific.

Good and bad examples of specific descriptions of replacement instruction.

J Good. Direct, explicit, systematic, phonemic-phonetic, word analytic approach to decoding, fluency, and spelling instruction, using controlled readers and expanding to non-controlled texts and passages upon attainment of mastery with controlled material. 45-60 minutes daily.

Direct, explicit, systematic instruction in vocabulary and pre-reading, reading, and post reading comprehension strategies. 45-60 minutes daily.

Direct, explicit, multisensory instruction in the five-step writing process, with use of graphic organizers, daily journaling, and daily peer edits, and with one-on-one assistance in the idea formation and editing process faded to elimination. Minimum of 90 minutes weekly, with additional one-on-one and small group support in the application of the learned writing process to completion of writing assignments in Language Arts, Social Studies, Music, and Health, as assigned.

Direct, explicit, sequential math instruction, emphasizing mastery of and fluency with basic operations and number systems; breaking down the problem-solving process into single steps; expressly defining math-related language. 30 minutes daily.



Social skills training one-on-one or in groups of not more than three students, with use of social stories and social scripting. 3 x 30 min./week.

M Bad. LS classroom for Language Arts and Math. Daily.

Resource teacher assistance with writing assignments. As needed.

Social skills group. 3x/week.

Good and bad examples of specific descriptions of adaptations.

J Good. Interspersing of favored or learned tasks with disfavored or new tasks or instruction at the greatest interval possible to sustain focus to disfavored or new task or instruction, with expansion of the interval when focus is sustained at the existing interval for ten consecutive days with not more than three verbal prompts for each disfavored or new task or period of instruction. During all disfavored or new instruction.

M Bad. Behavior intervention plan. Daily

J Good. Use of fading prompt hierarchy, selecting the least intrusive type of verbal and visual prompt and the lowest number of prompts that are sufficient to elicit the desired response and shifting to the next least intrusive type of prompt once the desired response is elicited in five consecutive observations with a single prompt at the existing level. During all academic instruction.

M Bad. Visual and verbal prompting. Daily.

M Bad. Highly structured environment. Daily.

J Good. Extended time for all tests requiring reading or requiring writing in excess of one sentence per item, up to twice the time allotted. For all testing as described.

M Bad. Extended time for all tests. Daily.

J Good. For new math and reading instruction, instructional group size not to exceed eight students. All new math and reading instruction.

M Bad. Small group size. All classes.

Good and bad examples of specific descriptions of modifications.

J Good. Josh will complete units 1 through 5, 7 through 9, 11, and 15 in the Pre-Algebra curriculum, with repetition and review of these units in the learning support class 30 minutes daily to ensure mastery.



J Good. In Social Studies and Science, Hillary will be responsible for learning factual information and application of that information to circumstances familiar to her. Her lab book in Science will contain accurate pictures of each step of the experiments, as performed by a lab partner. Social studies vocabulary will be previewed in the life skills support classroom prior to its introduction in the regular class. All Social Studies and Science instruction.

M Bad. Modified curriculum. As needed.

Rule 2: Be generic. Do not use brand names as a short-cut.

Good and bad examples of generic “specially designed instruction” language.

J Good. For introduction of new learning in the areas of language, behavior, and socialization, and for reinforcement of previously introduced learning when regression occurs over two consecutive trials or probes, the teacher will, in a highly consistent manner, (1) use a discriminative stimulus that (a) is simple and concise, and (b) uses consistent wording, and (c) uses a consistent format for presentation of materials or objects; (2) wait up to ten seconds for a response to this stimulus; (3) offer a discrete prompt to elicit the response if it is not provided after the waiting period; (3) immediately reinforce the exhibition of the desired response, with reinforcers that are varied to avoid satiation.

M Bad. Use of applied behavior analysis techniques.

J Good. Direct, explicit, systematic, phonemic-phonetic, word analytic approach to decoding, fluency, and spelling instruction, using controlled readers and expanding to non-controlled texts and passages upon attainment of mastery with controlled material.

M Bad. Wilson Reading method.

M Bad. SRA Direct Instruction.

Rule 3: Identify either a specific time and duration for each item, a specific condition to which each item applies, or a specific purpose for each item. Although the IDEA uses the phrase “frequency and duration” to describe the manner in which items of specially-designed instruction must be quantified, not all specially designed instruction lends itself to such numerical quantification. Certainly replacement instruction should always include specific frequency and duration commitments, as should time during which the child will receive scheduled tutoring or support in the special education classroom. Most items of specially-designed instruction that describe adaptations and modifications, on the other hand, will need to abandon time commitment language in favor of descriptions of the conditions under which the particular item of specially-designed instruction will be used or the purpose that the item will serve.



Good and bad examples of frequency and duration language.

J Good. 90 minutes daily.

J Good. 3 x 45 minutes weekly.

M Bad. Daily.

Good and bad examples of condition language.

J Good. At intervals established in the sensory break schedule developed by the occupational therapist and adjusted when attention is sustained to classroom tasks at the previous interval level.

J Good. When child demonstrates fatigue during assessments.

J Good. When child uses learned prosocial language to request contingent removal.

M Bad. As needed.

M Bad. When requested.

Good and bad examples of purpose language.

J Good. For all testing requiring writing more than one sentence per item.

J Good. For all new math application instruction.

J Good. (For a spell checker). For all written assignments and tests when correct spelling is not the primary object of the assignment or assessment.

M Bad. All classes.

writing effective and legally -defensible ieps: core...

Documents