The Implementation and Monitoring of the IEPs Essay

Published: 2020-02-17 12:30:37
863 words
4 pages
printer Print
essay essay

Category: Monitor

Type of paper: Essay

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Hey! We can write a custom essay for you.

All possible types of assignments. Written by academics

The implementation and monitoring of the IEPs is the duty of the school districts through the school teachers. It should be noted that the goal of IDEA is to educate children with disabilities with their non-disabled colleagues to the maximum extent possible. A child should only be placed in a separate environment (special classes) if the nature of the disability prevents the child from receiving education in the regular classroom even with the use of additional equipments and services.

In such cases a child is assessed in all areas related the perceived disability. The assessment of the learners in need of IEP is carried out by a collaboartive team that comprises of the learners parent(s) or guardian(s), a special education teacher, at least one regular education teacher, a representative of the school or district who possesses proper knowledge about the school resources that can be used to support the IEPs and lastly an individual who can draw inferences about the instructional needs of the learners evaluation results.

In addition, the parent or school is allowed to bring another person who may possess a vast knowledge on special education matters. The parent may also bring with them people/professionals who will assist them in discussing about the child with the rest of the team. To some extend the child can also participate in the EIP team meetings particularly if they are older enough (middle school). The composition of the EIP team may differ from state to state as some states have been known to include additional members, e. g. New York.

The law recognizes the parents as equal members of the EIP team who should be fully updated about the progress made by the child and to also dispute or requests for some modifications. [Public Law No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647] Need for Further Legal Refinement The definition of a disabled child according to the law is too ambiguous: as it is no child is considered to be too disabled to be denied the IDEA educational services. Naturally some children are so severely disabled that they cannot be benefit from Free Appropriate Public Education.

For example children who are permanently in vegetative status or even suffering from severe brain damage are considered eligible for FAPE. This makes unnecessary for such children to be educated as in most cases they will not even learn the most obvious things such as their names. This calls for amendment of the law to make it possible for such children to be realistically discriminated. Moreover, from a legal point of view the IDEA has many grey areas which need to be addressed if its full effect is to be felt among the American disabled children.

For instance, the law does address the issue of allocation of burden of persuasion regarding litigations filed by the parents, the school districts or the schools leaving courts with to make the decision in the event of a legal suit by any of the stakeholders. The IDEA is also silent on whether funds meant for the IEP can be used to pay for court cases and administrative expenses or to educational activities only. Further, the law does not shed the light as to whether parents who sue schools pertaining to the administration of the IEP to their children should be refunded the expert costs they incur.

Many are times when the IDEA funds are used by school district for administrative purposes a practice which to some extent goes against the objectives of the law. Again, the validity of IEP has been an issue in contention among the stakeholders. For instance the law seems to disagree with notion that every IEP is invalid until the school districts proofs it to be valid. [Schaffer V. Weast (04-698) 546 U. S. 49 (2005); Arlington v. Murphy (N0. 05-18) 402 F.

3d 332 (2006)] The law does not cater for transition of disabled children from school to the outside world. Whereas the law plays a crucial role in the providing an appropriate education to the disabled children, it is shy of providing transition skills that will impart ideas about available or not available community resources, infrastructure, or policies. Conclusions The education of special needs students in the U. S. has evolved from the time when disabled children were considered a source of burden to a family.

Today students with learning disabilities are given the same or even more attention as does the regular students, thanks to various laws prohibiting discrimination of any forms discrimination toward disabled people and more specifically laws that not only promote the education of disabled children but also promote their education alongside regular students. At the long run these laws have contributed in the ironing out of the perceived notions that disabled people are different from other non-disabled people in terms of carrying out educational instructions.


Arlington Central School District BD. Of Education v. Murphy (N0. 05-18) 402 F. 3d 332 (April 19, 2006) Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education, et al, 874 F. 2D 1036 (5th cir. 1989) Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (1974): 20 U. S. C. 1232g Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (1990): Public Law No. 101-476, 104 stat. 1142). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (1997): Public Law No. 105-17, 111 Stat. 37

Warning! This essay is not original. Get 100% unique essay within 45 seconds!


We can write your paper just for 11.99$

i want to copy...

This essay has been submitted by a student and contain not unique content

People also read