Mitchell Yell

The purpose of the study was to compare the effects of a software instruction format versus a textbook instruction format on (a) the reading performance (i.e., fluency and accuracy) of students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) and (b) the on-task behaviors of students with EBD. The software instruction format consisted of computer-generated reading activities. The textbook instruction format consisted of traditional reading books with comprehension questions and instructional activities. The effects were demonstrated with two second-grade boys with EBD, using an alternating treatment design. The study lasted for about a month with 28 sessions for each student. The results demonstrated that both participants' reading fluency (i.e., number of words read aloud correctly per minute by the students) and accuracy were higher and increased faster when the participants used software. The on-task behavior rates (i.e., percentage of time on task) were about the same in both conditions for each student. Furthermore, when the students were on task, their reading performance consistently increased with less variability than when they were not on task. Both students indicated their preference for the software instruction to the textbook instruction in the interviews at the end of the study.

The individualized education program (IEP) has been the cornerstone of special education since the Education for All Handicapped Children's Act became law in 1975. Nevertheless, IEPs have been fraught with legal and educational problems. In this article we examine the process for developing IEPs and suggest that, by using curriculum-based measurement, school districts can ensure that they develop and implement IEPs that both meet the requirements of the law and provide meaningful educational programs for students with disabilities who have basic skills deficits. We begin by examining problems in IEP development, focusing on violations of the IEP process. Then, we discuss the three major components of the IEP. Finally, we present a case study of the use of curriculum-based measurement to develop legally correct and educationally meaningful IEPs.

This article examines a case out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit: Ridley School District v. M.R and J.R. ex rel. E.R. (2012). The case is the first circuit court case in which the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act requirement that special education services be based on peer-reviewed research (PRR) was at issue. Recommendations for teachers and administrators working to meet the PRR requirement when developing intervention plans for students with disabilities are discussed.

The purpose of this article is to examine the free appropriate public education (FAPE) requirements of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The authors first briefly examine the definition of FAPE in the IDEA. Second, they delve into the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Board of Education v. Rowley and Endrew F. v. Douglas and how these decisions have affected the definition of FAPE. They next address the procedural, substantive, and implementation errors school district personnel often make when developing students’ special education programs. They offer suggestions on how faculty members can prepare their preservice teachers to understand and avoid these errors and develop educationally meaningful and legally correct special education programs that confer a FAPE.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), formerly the Education of All Handicapped Children Act, has exerted a profound influence on the education of students with disabilities. In 2004 major changes were made to the IDEA when it was amended in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. The category of disabilities that was most profoundly affected by these changes may have been the category of learning disabilities. In this chapter we (a) review the development and major components of the IDEA, (b) explain the important changes in the 2004 amendments for the education of students with learning disabilities, focusing on two specific requirements, and (c) reflect on possible changes in future amendments to the IDEA.

Individualized education programs (IEPs) are at the heart and soul of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).1 In her provocative article, Kids and Rules: Challenging Individualization in Special Education, Karen Syma Czapanskiy proposed abandoning the IEP requirements of the IDEA in favor of standardized plans for many students with disabilities.2 I agree that there are problems in the implementation of the IDEA. Czapanskiy, however, conflates implementation problems with irrelevancy. I believe her proposals, which are bureaucratic in nature, would vitiate the central purpose of the IDEA.3 Her solutions are based on a misunderstanding of (a) the importance of parental participation in special education, (b) the heterogeneous nature of students with disabilities, and (c) the centrality of individualization in the IDEA.I. PARENTAL PARTICIPATION IN THE SPECIAL EDUCATION PROCESSBateman explained that the most basic IEP requirement is that a student's parents be full, equal, and meaningful participants in the development of their child's IEP, along with school district personnel.4 In her article, Czapanskiy argued that parents are often not meaningfully involved in IEP development. I agree that parents and school-based personnel have never fully realized the promise of meaningful collaboration in the IEP process.5 However, Czapanskiy's argument that standardized plans are more likely to be "responsive to parental and public concerns" than the current "individualized regime"6 is counterproductive for two basic reasons. First, Congress and courts have repeatedly emphasized the importance of meaningful parental participation in special education programming. Second, scholars and the U.S. Department of Education have researched and provided funding to encourage and improve parental participation in special education.Congress emphasized the central role of parents in developing their children's IEP and ensuring the provision of free appropriate public education in the finding and purposes section of the IDEA:Almost thirty years of research and experience has demonstrated that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by- strengthening the role and responsibility of parents and ensuring that families .... have meaningful opportunities to participate in the education of their children ... .7Dr. Edwin Martin was a key player in virtually every piece of legislation that affected children with disabilities from Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) of 1975, renamed the IDEA in 1990. Dr. Martin, who served as an early commissioner of the Bureau of Education of the Handicapped and the first Assistant Secretary of Education for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services in the U.S. Department of Education, observed:I realized that parents had provided the energy and will to create special education programs wherever they occurred. ... It became apparent to me that there would be little, if any, special education if the parents had not created it, directly or through political persuasion.8No doubt Dr. Martin would agree with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' conclusions that interference with parental participation in IEP development undermines "the very essence of the IDEA"5 and that an "IEP which addresses the unique needs of the child cannot be developed if those people who are most familiar with the child's need are not involved or fully informed."10Special education researchers have shown the importance of parental participation in special education programming and development. For example, Iovannone, Dunlap, Huber, and Kincaid referred to parents' participation in their child's IEP development as a core component of effective educational programming11 because "a collaborative partnership with the family can contribute to the effectiveness of interventions and programming. …

Chapter 1 Introduction to Emotional and Behavioral Disorders Definition of EBD Classification of Students with EBD Prevalence of EBD Characteristics of Students with EBD History and Development of the Field Conceptual Models Causal and Risk Factors Interventions for Students with EBD Placement Options for Students with EBD Alternative Education Programs Juvenile Justice Mental Health Chapter 2 Legal Issues in Educating Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Disciplining Students with EBD Managing Student Records Reporting Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect Teacher Liability for Student Injury and Misconduct Chapter 3 Assessment of Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Assessment Assessing Students in Special Education Assessment and Intervention Accountability in Special Education Chapter 4 Applied Behavior Analysis History of ABA Characteristics of ABA Principles of Behavior Applying the Principlies of Behavior Defining and Describing Behavior Assessing Behavior Recording Systems Graphing Data and Making Instructional Decisions Using Positive Reinforcement to Change Behavior Programming for Generalization Chapter 5 Functional Behavior Assessments and Behavior Intervention Plans The Basis of FBA and Behavior Intervention Plans FBA Generic Methods for Completing an FBA Experimental Methods Positive Behavior Support and Behavior Intervention Plans Characteristics of Behavior Intervention Plans Building Positive Behavior Intervention Plans Implementation Fidelity Data Collection Crisis Management Chapter 6 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Procedures of Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Self Management Based Interventions Verbal Mediation Based Interventions Implementing Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Generalization of Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Chapter 7 Social Skills Instruction Formal Instruction of Social Skills Social Skills Assessment Informal Instruction of Social Skills Social Competence and Social Skills Social Competence and Students with EBD Encouraging Proscocial Behaviors Through Informal Procedures Chapter 8 Meeting the Needs of Students with EBD Through Collaborative Teaming Collaboration and Teaming: What Is It? Types of Collaborative Teams Collaborative Teaming: Why Do It? Collaborative Teaming: How Do You Create an Effective Collaborative Team? Collaborative Teaming: Who Is Involved? Family and School Collaboration Chapter 9 Developing Educationally Meaningful and Legally Sound Individualized Education Programs Legal Requirements Problems in IEP Development The IEP Planning Process Implementing the IEP Reviewing and Revising the IEP Developing Educationally Meaningful and Legally Sound IEPs Chapter 10 School-Wide Positive Behavior Support The Need of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support The Components of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Positive Behavior Support and the Total School System Implementing a System of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support School-Wide Positive Behavior Support and Academic Achievement School-Wide Positive Behavior Support and the Law Chapter 11 Classroom and Behavior Management I: Preventing Problem Behavior in the Classroom The Classroom Management Problem Prevention and Classroom Management Proactive vs. Reactive Classroom Management The Primary Components of a Proactive Classroom Management System Developing and Implementing a Proactive Classroom Management System Chapter 12 Classroom and Behavior Management II: Responding to Problem Behavior The Nature of Problem Behavior Ineffective Responding to Problem Behavior Principles to Follow When Responding to Problem Behavior Levels of Responding to Problem Behavior Developing Crisis Management Plans An Algorithm for Responding to Problem Behavior Chapter 13 Classroom and Behavior Management III: Intervening with Problem Behavior Consideration When Intervening to Address Problem Behavior Behavior Enhancement Interventions Behavior Reduction Interventions Chapter 14 Teaching Students with Emotional and Behavioral DisordersI: Effective Teaching Do Teachers of Students with EBD Use Effective Instructional Strategies? Principles of Effective Instruction Maintaining Effectiveness Chapter 15 Teaching Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders II: Evidence-Based Instructional Procedures and Students with EBD Teaching Reading Teaching Writing Teaching Mathematics Teaching Study Skills Chapter 16 Teaching Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders III: Planning Instruction and Monitoring Student Performance The Nature of Instructional Planning Planning What to Teach Planning How to Teach Monitoring Student Performance

This chapter describes possible effects of the 2017 Endrew F. Supreme Court decision that raised the de minimus standard established in 1982 in Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson School District v. Rowley. In Rowley, the court held school districts provided an appropriate education to students with disabilities by demonstrating that students' Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) are reasonably calculated to provide some educational benefit. In contrast, the Endrew F. decision requires IEPs to be reasonably calculated to provide progress that is appropriately ambitious in light of the child's circumstances. The implications of Endrew F. in the IEP process are delineated, including the importance of meaningful parent involvement; relevant and current statements of present levels of performance; challenging; ambitious and measurable goals; and frequent, systematic progress monitoring used to inform effective instructional changes that maximize student progress toward IEP goals. Finally, the authors discuss ways that Endrew F. may affect future litigation and that school districts may prepare to avoid possible litigation in the post-Endrew era.

The foundation of inclusion in special education law is the least restrictive environment (LRE) mandate of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This federal mandate requires that all students with disabilities receive their education with students without disabilities to the maximum extent appropriate. Our purpose in this chapter is to examine the legal basis of inclusion. We first review the historical antecedents of inclusion. Second, we examine the LRE mandate and the student placement requirements of the IDEA. Third, we survey the most important case law rulings regarding LRE and the placement of students with disabilities. Fourth, we consider strategies that have been used to promote inclusive placements and briefly review the literature on these strategies. We end this chapter by offering principles to guide IEP team members in making educationally beneficial and legally correct placement decisions for students with disabilities.

Thirty-one states have laws that may result in students being arrested for misbehavior in school that is often considered low-level rule violations. The problems with these laws include the vagueness and subjectivity of the language of the law. As a result, the enforcement of such laws has been criticized as being discriminatory, especially against minorities and students with disabilities. In 2016, the two laws in South Carolina were challenged in a series of important cases that stemmed from an arrest made of a student who posted a video of a violent, headline-grabbing altercation in her classroom involving a school resource officer. This brief report, (a) reviews the incident that led to the case in South Carolina, (b) examines the history and eventual outcome of the cases challenging the South Carolina laws, and (c) offers implications for improved practice.

In special education, medication often plays a critical role in meeting the needs of students with disabilities. The use of medications in schools, however, can be a problem when state laws and federal law conflict regarding the use of a medication, in this situation medical marijuana. This column reports on a ruling in the U.S. District Court in New Mexico involving medical marijuana, in which state law in New Mexico and federal law conflicted. A short-term solution may be for school districts to consider home instruction as a means to ensure a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for qualified students with disabilities who need medical marijuana. A long-term solution may be to amend state laws and the federal law (i.e., the Controlled Substances Act of 1970) that prohibits marijuana use, to allow the use and administration of medical marijuana in schools.

Five days after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High School District. This important decision involved a student who was being served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The student was blind and required a high level of support in all academic areas. The case addressed important issues regarding parental participation throughout the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process and the school district’s obligation to implement the IEP. This column (a) examines this decision by providing the facts of the case, including the decisions at the due process hearing level, U.S. district court, and U.S. Court of Appeals; (b) explores the ruling by the court of appeals decision; and (c) discusses implications of this decision for special education administrators and teachers.

Abstract The transition services requirement was added to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990. Congress included this mandate in the IDEA to ensure that students with disabilities would be prepared for post-school life. The mandate charges school district personnel with planning and implementing transition services as part of special education programming provided to all eligible students with disabilities when they reach age 16 or earlier if required by state law. The purpose of this chapter is to review the legal requirements regarding transition services and the delivery of transition programming to students with disabilities.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that school districts provide eligible students with specially designed instruction that confers a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Depending on the unique needs of a student, FAPE may include physical education services. The IDEA also requires that a student’s individualized education program (IEP) include adapted physical education services, when deemed necessary to meet a student’s needs. In this paper we (a) define and compare physical education and adapted physical education, (b) examine the FAPE of the IDEA requirements regarding physical education and adapted physical education, (c) review a recent policy letter issued by the U.S Department of Education on adapted physical education, (d) highlight several court cases on adapted physical education for students with disabilities, and (e) offer guidance on when to include physical education and adapted physical education in students’ IEPs.

Incidences such as students committing shootings, fighting with teachers and other students, perpetrating sexual assault, and bringing weapons to schools are concerning for administrators, teachers, and the public. To respond to such situations school officials have increasingly been using exclusionary and aversive measures as well as expanding police presence in schools. The purpose of this paper is to examine case law involving law enforcement in schools, with a specific emphasis on arresting and/or handcuffing students. We examined 33 court cases in which students were handcuffed in school. Although handcuffing was used in each of these cases, only nine students were arrested and charged. Students are being handcuffed for non-criminal offenses.

In this chapter we consider the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act’s (IDEA 2004) provision that requires that students’ special education services in their individualized education programs be based on peer-reviewed research (PRR). We begin by reviewing federal legislation (i.e., Educational Sciences Reform Act, 2002, IDEA 2004; No Child Left Behind Act, 2001; Reading Excellence Act, 1998), which influenced the PRR principle and eventually the PRR language in IDEA. Next, we examine the US Department of Education’s interpretation of PRR in IDEA 2004 and review administrative hearings and court cases that have further clarified the PRR requirement. Finally, we make recommendations for teachers and administrators working to meet the PRR requirement when developing intervention plans for students with disabilities.