The Autism Society Event and Education Recordings Archive

The IEP team has obtained comprehensive, scientifically validated, and accurately interpreted assessments in all areas of the student’s suspected disability and has written updated Present Level statements based on that information. Individualized goals and objectives addressing each area of need have been written, and an appropriate program of accommodations, supports, and related services has been developed, all of which will be provided in the student’s Least Restrictive Environment. All necessary signatures of consent have been secured, and all members of the student’s team have received copies of the IEP document.

Now what?

Are the parents and their team of professionals “done” until the next annual IEP review?

We assert that the IEP is not just a contract; it is meant to be a “road map” of sorts, providing guidance and direction to the professionals responsible for educating the student and observable “landmarks” for parents to gauge how effectively the program is addressing the student’s needs. As with any map, however, it is useful only when referenced along the way. Just as one would not read a map and then leave it aside while traveling an unfamiliar path, IEP teams should not file the IEP document away after the meeting, relying on intuition and prior experience as they make (or evaluate) instructional decisions throughout the school year. Nor should parents simply wait for the school staff to provide intermittent, anecdotal updates about the student's progress. On the contrary, all involved must pay as much attention to the specific components of the IEP during implemention as they do during development.

How can parents know whether or not their child’s IEP is being implemented correctly? Are parents permitted to know what training the staff has received and whether the training is adequate? What progress information can parents reasonably expect and request from the school team? Who chooses the progress monitoring tools, and who determines whether or not they are being used as designed? When should progress monitoring occur?

Participants will (1) consider several common pitfalls in implementing IEPs and strategies for avoiding them, (2) learn the fundamental aspects of data-driven progress monitoring and how best to incorporate it in the IEP process, and (3) understand their rights to obtain accurate fidelity data, as well as the difference between evaluating program fidelity and ordinary staff performance reviews.

Session Outline:

1. Introduction and Background
   1. Need for effective progress monitoring in between IEP reviews: IDEA requirements, etc.
   2. School over-reliance on anecdotal and subjective feedback approaches
   3. Hidden needs: staff training, fidelity of implementation, external assessment of program quality, student response (or failure to respond)
2. Implementation
   1. Tools, strategies, methods
   2. Implementation vs. Curriculum/Instructional Methodology
   3. What’s really happening in the classroom
3. Fidelity – Not a Measure of Student Performance
   1. What is (and isn’t) data
   2. Selecting qualified evaluators
   3. What the numbers mean
   4. Assembling all the relevant information
   5. Ensuring consistency across settings and providers
   6. The politics of collecting data on public employees
4. Progress Monitoring
   1. Scientifically validated methods and instruments
   2. The (appropriate) role of observation and anecdote
   3. When “course corrections” are necessary
5. Questions?