Being SMART

Writing a cogent, comprehensive, and understandable IEP is tough.  Even with a standardized format, goal banks, and computerized writing tools, writing an IEP can daunting for even long-experienced folks.  Sandwiched between basic information on the first page and everyone’s signatures on the back page are the student’s profile and his specially designed goals and objectives. 

Most departments of education and most school districts get pretty nit-picky about goal-writing.  Each goal needs to identify several components:  (1) who (2) will do what (3) to what degree (4) under what conditions (5) for how long?  And (6) how will you know? To confound goal-writing even more, we have to make sure our goals are SMART; that is, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound.  And let’s not forget that the goals have to be tied to the curriculum standards.

If you, your colleagues, or your staff suffers from some level of IEP-Writing Phobia, or you just want to develop more confidence and competence in writing defensible IEPs, PLC Consultants offers a learning module where real practice leads to real results through online support and collaborative learning.  Take a look.

The IEP Chore

IEPs are time-consuming and a chore to write.  We second-guess ourselves: Should this be worded differently? Is the profile going to pass my Special Ed Director’s critical eye? Where am I supposed to put sensitive information?  Do all my dates line up so that I’m in compliance with all the state and federal mandates? Who will visit me in IEP jail?

The writers of the IEP aren’t the only ones who worry. The readers and implementers fret about what they are (being) committed to, how they have to collect data, and under what circumstances things can change.  Knowing that the IEP is a legally-binding document between the school and the family doesn’t make the whole process any less stressful.

Of particular concern for regular classroom teachers is their role.  As educational team members, they should be providing for information about what goes into the education plan, but often they nod in silent agreement, deferring to the special ed teacher.  That’s understandable, but it makes it hard for the teacher to feel invested in the process or the outcomes. 

Within the IEP itself, we are forced to ask ourselves hard questions. What kinds of supports, accommodations, or modifications are necessary and for what purpose? Have we considered the need for any assistive technology?  We are going to struggle with the answers if we aren’t sure exactly what the differences are among all of these terms.  That, in turn, erodes our confidence and makes us want to  say, “Just tell me what to do and I’ll do it.”  Unfortunately, that’s not how the process works.

If you are one of the many teachers or administrators who aren’t sure about all this IEP writing stuff and what it means to be committed to the plan, take a look at Module 3: IEP Boot Camp I.  You’ll find opportunities to share your anxieties AND your expertise through this online professional learning community.

Basic Training

There’s really nothing “basic” about special education.  And it’s just as tough to use the words “typical” or  “usually.”  Every kid is different.  Each student, whether or not he has an identified disability, comes to us with different “inputs:” home environment, background experiences, cultural considerations, personal value and belief systems.  Things we can do nothing about.  So, we change and implement what we can to support each student’s unique needs.  And that’s really what’s “basic” about Special Education. 

Within the labyrinth that is Special Education, IDEA recognizes thirteen disability categories.  Some of those categories are subdivided into more specific diagnoses.  Take the category of Specific Learning Disability, for example.  A “learning disability” can fall into 8 subcategories, such as Reading Comprehension or Listening Skills or Math Calculation.  Confused yet?  Just wait! 

Besides the variety of possible labels, we are required to provide a “continuum” of educational service delivery models.  Some kids with severe disabilities rarely have the opportunity to be with “normal” kids their age at school.  There are other kids who require minimal supports and spend their entire school day in their regular classroom with their friends.  A lot of kids have their educational needs met somewhere in the middle. 

On top of all of these variables, we have the educational team, which looks different for every kid in Special Education.  It’s hard to always know where we as educators are supposed to fit in the team scheme.  If all of this Special Ed stuff is a struggle that you or your colleagues face, Module 2: “Special Education Basics,” can provide clarification and support through online learning and collaboration.  Take a look.

A Big Boat

Inclusion isn’t easy.  And it isn’t new.  And it isn’t going away.  IDEA makes clear that the default placement for all children is the general education classroom and there’d better be solid, documented reasons for doing anything different.  Schools and teachers have been trying to make inclusion work for decades.   But high caseloads, scheduling nightmares, and lack of confidence in general educators’ abilities in working with kids with special needs present barriers to success.

Study after study shows that when teachers are armed with knowledge about Special Education, they demonstrate greater confidence, competence, and comfort in teaching students with disabilities.  But what kind of information do they need?  Well, for starters, there’s Special Ed Alphabet Soup.  All teachers need to have a working knowledge about ETRs, IEPs, RtI, UDL, OTs, PTs, SLPs, AT, ASD, LD, OHI, AD/HD, OCD, SED…you get the idea.

Secondly, we need to know our role in developing and implementing educational plans for students with disabilities.  The classroom teacher isn’t off the hook because a student has an IEP.  As a matter of fact, general educators have a legal obligation to understand and implement the supports that are written in this legally binding document.  So if Steven needs large print in order to access the curriculum or a way to demonstrate his learning other than a written test, these needs must be supported throughout this school day in every area, not just when he’s with the resource teacher.

We need each other to accomplish everything the IEP proscribes. We need the expertise of our special education teachers who understand how to individualize instruction; we need our general educators’ knowledge of curricular demands; we need paraprofessionals who have a clearly defined support role; we need support at the administrative level that encourages and facilitates collaboration.

Inclusion says: “We’re all in this together.”  Take a look at how PLC Consultants helps educators across the curricular spectrum make sense of inclusion.

A Brief PD History

The ideas behind professional development for educators is almost as old as public schools themselves.  Often, PD has a deserved reputation of being expensive, vague, and ineffective.  The basic workshop approach was often perceived as a day away from students with little to show for it afterward but doodles on the handouts.

But things began to change in the 1990s.  Public education began to see the development of "inquiry teams."   Generally, all the third grade teachers would get together before school, plan a less or two, maybe read a chapter in a book, give students an assessment, then analyze the data.  Many districts have embraced this approach because it's cheap and is district-specific.  Even so, there is research that says even this approach isn't terribly effective.

And still there are gaps.

Very little district-devised district-wide PD has anything to do with a good portion of the teaching staff.  For example, the Art, Music, and PE teachers aren't invested in academic learning in the same ways that content-area teachers are.  And special educators are marginalized too.  Those folks really need PD designed specifically for them; something that many districts just don't have the time, expertise, or energy to create. Most often schools assign paraprofessionals to support students with disabilities, most of whom do not hold college degrees, have little to no experience with students with disabilities are often thrown to the wolves without much training at all, even though parapros crave responsible and effective training. What is intended as assistance to the teaching staff actually becomes a hindrance, and the people who are hurt the most are our students.

As we work toward developing 21st Century Skills in our students, educators who value life-long learning, work to find new and improved ways to support teachers in their need for ongoing, effective, and valuable professional development. 

We need to put the days of ticket-punch training behind us.