Changes in IDEA 2004: Implications for School Psychology

IDEA 2004 TimelinesP.L. 108-446 • President Bush signs the bill on Dec. 3, 2004 • Law went into effect July 1, 2005 • Draft IDEA Regulations published in the Federal Register on June 21, 2005 • 75-day public commentary period on draft regulations through Sept. 6, 2005 • NASP representatives provide comments at public meetings in June and July 2005

IDEA 2004 TimelinesP.L. 108-446 • NASP submits written recommendations to OSERS on draft regulations on Sept. 2, 2005 • Jan. 2006 - OSERS estimated target completion date for final regulations • State regulations to follow final federal regulations • Local policies and procedures to be revised accordingly • NASP will continue to provide members with IDEA information and resources

What’s in the New IDEA? • The law preserves the basic structure and civil rights guarantees of IDEA, but also makes significant changes in certain provisions • We will discuss changes to: evaluation timelines, transition to postsecondary, reevaluations, IEPs, early intervening services, disproportionality, discipline, personnel qualifications, LD identification, IDEA resources, and important advocacy information.

Evaluation Timelines • Evaluations: must be completed and the eligibility determination made within 60 days from consent unless the state establishes a different timeline • NASP asked the Department to clarify in regulations that the state’s timeline should be 60 school days.

Transition to Postsecondary • Transition: planning and services must begin at age 16 (changed from age 14); reevaluation not required before leaving secondary school; new summary of performance provision

Exit Evaluations • Language was added in Section 614 (c) (5) (B), based on what is currently in existing federal regulations stating that a student does not need to be reevaluated before leaving secondary school due to graduation or exceeding age of eligibility.

Congressional IntentFinal Senate Committee Report on S.1248 Exit Evaluations: • The committee has heard that LEAs feel compelled by current statutory language to conduct a reevaluation of a child with a disability when he or she either graduates from secondary school or ages out of IDEA eligibility. Both parents and schools have complained that a reevaluation seems unnecessary, time-consuming and costly. The committee agrees.

Congressional Intent on SOPsFinal Senate Committee Report on S.1248 • The bill also requires LEAs to provide a SOP. The committee intends for this summary to provide specific, meaningful, and understandable information to the student, the student’s family, and any agency, including postsecondary schools, which may provide services to the student. • Furthermore, the committee does not expect LEAs to conduct any new assessments or evaluations in providing the summary; rather it should be based upon information the school has already gathered on the child.

Procedures for Reevaluations An LEA must ensure that a reevaluation for each child with a disability is conducted in accordance with Sections 614(b) and 614(c) if: • The LEA determines that the educational or related services needs, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, of the child warrant a reevaluation; or • The child’s parents or teacher requests a reevaluation.

Reevaluations: options to extend timelines • However, a reevaluation shall occur not more frequently than once a year, unless the parent and the LEA agree otherwise; and at least once every three years, unless the parent and the LEA agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary. [614(a)(2)]

Congressional IntentFinal Senate Committee Report on S.1248 Reevaluations: In the interest of parents, children and school districts, the committee believes that requiring costly and time-consuming reevaluations when both parents and LEAs deem them to be unnecessary is counterproductive. To this end, the committee has amended Section 614 (a)(2) to state clearly that the LEA does not have to conduct a reevaluation of a child with a disability if both the parent and the LEA agree it is unnecessary.

Changes to IEPs • Voluntary 3-year IEPs in 15 pilot states • Elimination of short term objectives except for students with significant cognitive disabilities • Objectives replaced with “measurable annual goals” that must align with state standards and the NCLB accountability system

Attendance at IEP Meetings • Team members may be excused from an IEP meeting. • Changes to IEPs can be made in certain circumstances without convening team.

Development of IEP Consideration of special factors: The IEP Team must- • In the case of a child whose behavior impedes his or her learning or the learning of others, consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports to address that behavior • In the case of a child with limited English proficiency, consider the language needs of the child as those needs relate to the IEP.

Rationale for Disciplinary ProvisionsSlide provided by George Bear, Ph.D. • Right to FAPE versus Right to Safe and Orderly Schools • Discipline provisions apply primarily in cases in which the child’s parents do not consent to a change in placement • IDEA 2004 discipline provisions are clearly intended to provide school personnel with greater discretion.

Major Changes in Discipline Provisions “Unique” circumstances may be considered. School personnel may consider any unique circumstances on a case-by-case basis when deciding to order a change in placement for a child with a disability who violates code of student conduct.

Unique Circumstances (cont.)Information provided by George Bear, Ph.D. NASP recommendation for regulations: Consideration of unique circumstances on a case-by-case basis should apply when: • school personnel desire to extend the length of placement in an IAES for more than 45 days or • when school personnel decide not to enforce the code of conduct, e.g. suspending a child.

Discipline • New streamlined criteria for manifestation determinations: • If conduct was caused by, or had a direct and substantial relationship to, child’s disability, or • If conduct was direct result of the LEA’s failure to implement the IEP • Sec. 615(k)(1)(E)

Functional Behavioral Assessments • IDEA 2004 retains the requirement for conducting FBAs under specific circumstances • If a student’s conduct is determined to be a manifestation of his or her disability, the team must conduct an FBA and implement a behavioral intervention plan (or review previous ones).

Behavior Not a Manifestation of the Disability (cont.) • The school may apply the relevant disciplinary procedures to children with disabilities in the same manner and duration as would apply to all children, except the child shall: 1) Continue to receive educational services, so as to enable the child to participate in the general education curriculum, although in another setting, and to progress towards meeting IEP goals and

Behavior Not a Manifestation of the Disability (cont.) 2) Receive, as appropriate, a functional behavioral assessment, and behavioral intervention services and modifications that are designed to address the behavior violation so that it does not recur.

Interim Alternative Educational Settings • IDEA 2004 modifies language regarding the provision of services while in an IAES • Students must be provided services that enable the child to participate in the general education curriculum and progress towards meeting IEP goals.

Discipline • School district may remove a student to an interim alternative educational setting for up to 45 school days for weapons or drugs, regardless of manifestation determination • Additional reasons for removal: • Has inflicted serious bodily injury upon another person at school or at a school function

Stay Put Provisions • The law eliminates the right of a student with a disability to “stay put” in the current educational placement pending appeal of a manifestation determination for any alleged violations of the school code that could result in removal for more than 10 days. • IDEA ’97 only denied stay put in cases involving drugs, weapons or other dangerous behaviors.

Early Intervening Services • Greater emphasis on use of early intervening services • School districts will be able to use up to 15% of their federal funds for early intervening services • May be used for professional development, academic and behavioral supports

Early Intervening Services • Educational evaluations, services, and supports, including scientifically based literacy instruction. • Behavioral evaluations (FBAs), and services and supports, including positive behavioral interventions and supports. • Should be considered part of a problem-solving model

Early Intervening Services • Professional development - for teachers and “other school staff” to enable them to deliver scientifically based academic and behavioral interventions, including scientifically based literacy instruction.

Early Intervening Services NASP’s recommendations: • Related services personnel, specifically, school psychologists are ideally trained to develop academic and behavioral interventions which are directly linked to improved academic achievement. • Utilizing current, well-qualified, school personnel can improve collaboration between general and special education staff and allow for improved coordination and implementation of NCLB and IDEA programs.

Disproportionality • IDEA 2004 expands the provisions addressing disproportionate representation • States and LEAs will still have to collect data on the race and ethnicity of students by the various disability categories and the restrictiveness of placements

Disproportionality (cont.) • In addition, the incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary action, including suspensions and expulsions must now be reported • LEAs with significant disproportionality will be required to reserve the maximum amount of funds (15%) for early intervening services

Personnel Standards • No “highly qualified” language for related services providers, but: • Must meet state standards • Excludes emergency or temporary waiver of certification

Personnel QualificationsSec. 612 (law) and Sec. 300.156 (regs) The State education agency (SEA) establishes and maintains qualifications to ensure that school personnel are appropriately and adequately prepared and trained, and those personnel must have content knowledge and skills to serve children with disabilities.

Related Services Personnel and Paraprofessionals The qualifications for related services personnel and paraprofessionals are: • consistent with any State-approved or State-recognized certification, licensing, registration, or other comparable requirements (e.g., the NCSP) that apply to the professional discipline in which those personnel are providing special education or related services.

Related Services Personnel and Paraprofessionals (cont.) • ensure that related services personnel who deliver services in their discipline have not had certification or licensure requirements waived on an emergency, temporary, or provisional basis. This means that states cannot issue a certificate to someone simply because a district is in need of a school psychologist. However…

Related Services Personnel and Paraprofessionals (cont.) • it will allow paraprofessionals and assistants who are appropriately trained and supervised, in accordance with State law, regulation, or written policy, in meeting the requirements of this part to be used to assist in the provision of special education and related services under this part to children with disabilities.

Identification of Learning DisabilitiesSection 614 (b)(6) • New flexibility • Law now gives LEA’s option to eliminate IQ-discrepancy requirements • “In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, an LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability.”

Identification of Learning DisabilitiesSection 614 (b)(6) • In determining whether a child has a specific LD, an LEA may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs 2 and 3 (of Section 614).

Evaluation ProceduresSec. 614 (b)(2) Conduct of the Evaluation – the LEA shall • use a variety of assessment tools and strategies… • not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion… • use technically sound instruments…

Evaluation ProceduresSec. 614 (b)(3) Additional Requirements for Evaluations: assessments and other evaluation materials are-- • selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis, • provided and administered in the language most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is not feasible to so provide or administer;

Evaluation Procedures (cont.)Sec. 614 (b)(3) Additional requirements cont. • assessments and other evaluation materials are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel… • the child is assessed in all areas of suspected disability… • assessment tools and strategies are provided that directly assist in determining the educational needs of the child

Evaluation Procedures (cont.)Sec. 614 (b) (5) Special Rule for Eligibility – not a disability if the determinant factor is • lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math; • limited English proficiency • exclusionary factors (vision, hearing, motor, mental retardation, emotional disturbance, cultural factors, or environmental or economic disadvantage)

Proposed LD Regulations300.307 to 300.310 • See the side-by-side comparing LD regulations from IDEA ’97 to draft IDEA 2004 regulations on the NASP IDEA Info webpage • 300.307 Specific Learning Disabilities. (a) A State must adopt criteria for determining whether a child has a SLD as defined in 300.8 Child with a disability. (b) Consistency with State criteria. A public agency must use the State criteria adopted to determine SLD.

Proposed Regulations (cont.) 300.307 Specific Learning Disabilities The criteria adopted by the State: • May prohibit the use of a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement • May not require the use of a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement • Must permit the use of a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation procedures • May permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures for determining SLD

LD Proposed Regulations (cont.)300.308 Group Members • Team members has been replaced with the term “group members” • The group is collectively qualified to 1) conduct individual diagnostic assessments in speech and language, academic achievement, intellectual development, and social-emotional development; 2) interpret assessment data, and apply critical analysis to that data

LD Proposed Regulations (cont.)300.308 Group Members 3) develop appropriate educational and transitional recommendations based on assessment data 4) deliver and monitor specially designed instruction and services to meet the needs of a child with a specific learning disability

LD Proposed Regulations (cont.)300.308 Group Members • The group minimally includes the parent, a special education teacher, the general education teacher, • Other professionals, if appropriate, such as a school psychologist, reading teacher, or educational therapist

LD Proposed Regulations (cont.)300.309 Determining the existence of SLD A group may determine a child has a SLD if – 1) The child does not achieve commensurate with the child’s age in one or more of the following when provided with learning experiences appropriate for the child’s age: oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading fluency skills, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, mathematics problem solving

LD Proposed Regulations (cont.)300.309 Determining the existence of SLD 2) (i) The child fails to achieve a rate of learning to make sufficient progress to meet State-approved results in one or more of the 8 areas when assessed with a response to scientific, research-based intervention process; or

LD Proposed Regulations (cont.)300.309 Determining the existence of SLD (ii) The child’s exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, or a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement or both, relative to intellectual development, that is determined by the team to be relevant to the identification of a SLD, using appropriate assessments consistent with 300.304 and 300.305; and 3) not primarily result of the exclusionary factors

Changes in IDEA 2004: Implications for School Psychology