Working Together is a collection of CADRE resources designed to support effective collaboration between parents, schools, and early childhood programs. In the following video, Marshall Peter, Director of CADRE, gives a brief introduction to Working Together: Building Improved Communication.
Click on any Lego building block below to begin exploring these resources. We recommend viewing the videos in this order:
Understanding Positions & Interests
A Tale of Two Conversations (a 2-part video from the PA Office for Dispute Resolution).
These videos may be useful before or during... Informal Resolution Processes, IEP/IFSP Meetings, Resolution Meetings, Mediation Sessions, Staff Trainings, Pre-Service Training for Administrators and Teachers, Co-Populated Trainings with Parents and Educators, and Training for Secondary Students with Disabilities.
Recent Legal Developments of Interest to Special Educators [Abstract]
An overview is provided of five recent legal developments that merit special attention of special educators: (a) the amended Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) regulations concerning parental consent, including subsequent agency interpretations concerning their practical application; (b) the IDEIA provisions and resulting state laws and implementation issues for response to intervention; (c) the IDEIA provision for basing the individualized education program statement of special education on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable and subsequent case law applying this provision; (d) the case law on behalf of students with autism spectrum disorder, including the issues of eligibility and free appropriate public education or least restrictive environment; and (e) the IDEIA revisions concerning discipline, with special attention to suspensions/expulsions, disproportionality, and the corresponding Section 504 requirements.
It’s Time for an Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure This article presents the case for arbitration as a fitting process for special education disputes.
"the availability of arbitration as suggested [herein] would add two improvements to the IDEA dispute resolution system that experience shows are sorely needed: a more balanced “access to justice” and swift and final decisions (at least for a while). Both of these improvements would be of material benefit to the person who is supposed to be the focus of the process: the child." (p.362)
The author considers the potential drawbacks of mediation and due process hearings, before turning to a discussion of arbitration's apparent fitness. The article closes with a thoughtful and circumspect admonition that this proposed addition would require trial and testing.
Avoiding Procedural Errors in Individualized Education Program Development This article reviews five common procedural errors in IEP development:
- Not Including Students' Parents in the IEP Process
- Predetermining a Student's IEP Services or Placement
- Determining Placement Before Programming
- Not Fielding an Appropriate IEP Team
- Failing to Implement the IEP as Written
The article includes a table of Procedural Do's and Don't's, as well as three worksheets to ensure that meetings are planned and conducted appropriately.
“Appropriate” Decisions Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act This article offers analysis and recommendations concerning impartial hearing officers' (IHOs) decisions under IDEA, specifically in FAPE cases.
[Excerpt from introduction]
"The article consists of three successive parts. The first part provides observations and recommendations concerning the prevailing norms for the legal defensibility of the IHO’s written decision. The second part addresses the FAPE standards in terms of a three-step framework for decision-making. The final part canvasses the primary remedies—tuition reimbursement and compensatory education—other than prospective injunctive relief." (p.245)
"Appropriate IHO decisions under the IDEA borrow from best practices in administrative adjudication more generally but also add the specialized features of the IDEA statutory and regulatory framework and the extensive case law. This outline of observations and recommendations focuses on these specialized additions, with due customization for the variance attributable to differences among (1) state special education laws in terms of their added requirements, and (2) judicial jurisdictions in terms of their particular interpretations." (p.260)
All Areas of Suspected Disability Abstract:
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires school districts to assess children “in all areas of suspected disability.” It further provides that each child’s individualized education program (IEP) must contain measurable annual goals designed to “meet each of the child’s...educational needs that result from the child’s disability,” and a statement of special education and related services that will be provided for the child “to advance appropriately toward attaining annual goals.”
Courts have strictly enforced these requirements in the last several years, remedying violations of IDEA when school districts fail to assess in all areas of suspected disability or do not establish goals and services to meet each of the child’s needs resulting from the disability. This Article offers three interpretations of this recent development. First, what the courts are doing may represent an effort to enforce provisions of IDEA that stand apart from the limited reading that a 1982 Supreme Court case placed on the requirement in the statute to provide a free, appropriate public education. Second, the development may signify a different way of looking at special education obligations under the law, one well adapted to the ever-increasing importance attached to providing services in settings that are less restrictive and maintain the greatest inclusion of students with disabilities with non-disabled students. Third, the cases might simply be a reaction to cutbacks on evaluations and services that school districts have imposed because of financial strains brought about by the Great Recession. This Article will not try to declare which of these interpretations is the correct one, and in fact all three may be true. But the Article will conclude that enforcement of these provisions furthers the underlying purposes Congress had in enacting IDEA.
Special Education Hearing Officers: Balance and Bias Abstract
The use of a simple 50%-50% box score of decisions for parents and districts, respectively, is a false measure of the impartiality of hearing officers under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This analysis canvasses relevant structural factors that the stakeholders, the mass media, and the professional literature have failed to recognize both generally and systematically. These factors include IDEA amendments, regulatory revisions, Supreme Court decisions, lower court precedents, and state system changes that cumulatively suggest that a more nuanced view is both appropriate and necessary.
Adjudicative Remedies for Denials of FAPE under the IDEA This article analyzes cases in which courts or hearing officers have found that a child has been denied free and appropriate public education. The two most commonly-ordered remedies were reimbursement of tuition, and compensatory education.
The author engages six questions:
(1) What is the relative frequency of the various types of FAPE violations?
(2) What is the relative frequency of the various IDEA remedies?
(3) For the most frequent remedies, does the distribution differ markedly between IHO/RO and court decisions?
(4) Do certain states have a particular propensity for the most frequent remedies?
(5) What has been the adjudicative disposition, or outcomes, of these predominant remedies?
(6) Does any other, more qualitative trend emerge as notable?
The School-Family Partnership Training Program [Abstract ]
The School Family Partnership Training Program was an innovative program created and implemented out of a desire to assist schools and families to connect with one another. The program was implemented over a six-week period with one and one-half hour combined sessions for families of a local urban elementary school. The goal of the program was to increase the level of involvement of families of children with disabilities, as well as assist them in building effective home-school partnerships. It was a program that helped children with exceptional needs achieve higher levels of school success through the involvement of their families in the school. Data resulting from this program showed that the program significantly impacted the participants. Through participation in the program, families redefined their roles in the education of their children and explored multiple possibilities for family involvement.
Six Tips for Successful IEP Meetings This article highlights the essential elements of successful IEP meetings. Under the umbrella of communication are six elements: pre-meeting planning, meeting facilitator, meeting agenda, ground rules, essential knowledge, and limit jargon.
"Effective open communication techniques can place IEP team members on productive meetings, which in turn produce holistic IEPs that fully address the student's needs. When IEP team members communicate well, the IEP becomes a useful tool for guiding instruction and monitoring progress (i.e., assessment). The tips and strategies provided in this article can help foster a positive team atmosphere that provides a foundation for successful IEP meetings."
Building parent trust in the special education setting: educators and parents of students with special needs must work together to change school culture and move from conflict to collaboration [Excerpt]
"If trust is born in strong relationships, then first encounters are critical. Parents of students with disabilities undergo a great deal of stress and come to us--the educational professionals--for help with vital specialized tasks, including assessment, placement, progress monitoring, and maintenance of their child's ongoing needs.
Often, parents arrive at our school door-steps with apprehension. Some parents are seeking a cure. Some don't believe their child has a disability. Some parents are angry with themselves or even the system itself and look to us for answers.
Special education is a framework where the very foundation is built on adversarial relations--where parents hire attorneys and advocates to fight against districts. We need to lead the way in changing this culture and move from conflict to collaboration.
Collaboration between schools and parents is the foremost approach to accurate educational planning and rests primarily on two principles of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: parent participation and procedural due process. IDEA requires parents to be included in the educational process."
Latina Mothers' Views of a Parent-to-Parent Support Group in the Special Education System Abstract: Parent-professional partnership literature continues to emphasize the importance of including the parent voice. Spanish-speaking families are often excluded from such studies because of the language barrier. This article presents a qualitative interview study of eight Latina mothers of children with severe disabilities. All participants were members of a parent-to-parent support group available through a local community board. Data analysis revealed that the mothers identified three major benefits of the parent-to-parent support group, including (a) feeling like a family, (b) having a source of information, and (c) receiving emotional support. Findings indicated that information and assistance the parents were missing from the school system were offered through their group. Implications for educational providers and future research will be presented and discussed.
The existence of trust in the relationship of parents and district administration in the placement process of 3- to 8-year-old students with autism Abstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify the degree to which trust-building variables exist between public school districts and parents of 3- to 8-year-old children with autism during the initial placement process in the perception of special education administration. Additional purposes of the study were to identify barriers and strategies used to establish trust in this relationship.
Methodology: This study is a descriptive study using both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection and data analysis. Experienced special education directors were those who met specific criteria. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in a semistructured interview that included a survey and exploratory interview questions.
Findings: The findings of this study were as follow: (a) the existence of trust is critical in these initial relationships of the placement process; (b) school districts are not part of the initial interventions with autistic children and their parents; (c) trust is perceived by administration as occasional or sometimes in existence in relationships, communication, and problem solving; (d) conflict must be used as a learning tool; and (e) staff can improve their practice if provided opportunities for deliberate teaching and learning in the area of problem solving.
Conclusions: To prevent special education litigation and improve the levels of trust, school districts must (a) understand the environmental dynamics of a multi-agency process, (b) make time and teaching of process a priority, and (c) examine and utilize methods of joint problem solving.
Recommendations: Future studies could (a) examine ways to better collaborate with early intervention agencies and medical communities, (b) be conducted on the use of and success of facilitated IEP team meetings, and (c) examine proactive methods of using problem solving, conflict, and constructive criticism as a learning tool for staff.
A Posture of Reciprocity: A Practical Approach to Collaboration Between Professionals and Parents of Culturally Diverse Backgrounds Abstract:
The current emphasis on developing culturally responsive services for families of children with disabilities from culturally diverse backgrounds informs the need for professional self-awareness whereby professionals learn to recognize not only the cultural specificity of personal values and beliefs but also of their professional practice. We describe an approach, the posture of reciprocity, that enables professionals to acquire this level of cultural awareness. Examples to illustrate applications of the posture are provided.
Postsecondary Transition Under IDEA 2004: A Legal Update Abstract
Postsecondary transition planning for students with disabilities first entered the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990. The required provisions for transition planning were updated with the amendments to IDEA in 1997 and its reauthorization in 2004. Since IDEA 2004 took effect in July 2005, 11 court cases have been decided related to postsecondary transition planning. This article summarizes recent litigation in transition and discuss practice implications.
Compliance and Practices in Transition Planning: A Review of Individualized Education Program Documents Abstract:
This study examined the extent to which transition components of students’ Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) were compliant with IDEIA 2004; the extent to which transition components provided evidence of best practices; the association among disability, ethnicity, compliance, and practices; and the relationship between compliance and best practices. The sample included African American, European American, and Hispanic students with developmental, emotional, and learning disabilities. Low levels of full compliance were found in these IEPs. Approximately half of the substantiated transition practices were found in the IEPs. Disability and ethnicity were associated with the probability of an IEP being compliant and/or having evidence of best practices. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between compliance and practices.
Community and Connection in Inclusive Early-Childhood Education : A Participatory Action Research Investigation This article presents findings from a participatory action research project at an early-childhood center. The findings lead to recommendations for inclusive early-childhood environments, gathered within three categories:
The Meaning of Membership
- Establish intentional rituals and routines each day.
- Make the time to connect.
- Be intentional and consistent about creating opportunities to connect.
The Essence of Collaboration
- Establish written protocols to successfully support all children.
- Schedule adequate time to plan and reflect.
- Ensure diverse perspectives at meetings.
Understanding of Difference Within the Context of Community
- Put into action a solid commitment to foster deep learning about differences—not just mere exposure to them.
- Reaffirm the beauty and significance of all forms of diversity.
- Create smooth transitions when children move from one classroom to another.
A Framework for Providing Culturally Responsive Early Intervention Services [Abstract] The purpose of this article is to provide a framework that offers a way for early intervention (EI) service providers to better meet the needs of the culturally diverse children and families they serve. This framework was created to organize existing research and literature on cultural responsiveness in a way that fit the unique context of EI. The framework draws from multiple fields of study, including early childhood, multicultural, and special education, as well as psychology and speech-language pathology, and synthesizes knowledge and best practices into four guiding principles: (1) Examining One's Own Culture; (2) Acquiring Knowledge of Family Cultures; (3) Building Culturally Responsive Practices; and (4) Reflecting and Evaluating Practices. Each principle ties together correspondent themes and ideas from multiple fields, and suggests knowledge and best practices that can be utilized to increase one's cultural responsiveness when working with families.
It’s Not the “What,” It’s the “How”: Four Key Behaviors for Authentic Leadership in Early Intervention This article discusses four key behaviors that are intrinsic to natural, “authentic” leadership, including: 1) exercising influence to reach shared goals, 2) engaging in continuous learning, 3) building and nurturing relationships, and 4) modeling behaviors desired of others. The behaviors highlighted are both unique and “inextricably linked,” and though presented through an early intervention lens, are applicable across a broad spectrum of settings and situations, as evidenced by the authors’ cited sources.
Using Interagency Collaboration to Support Family-Centered Transition Practices [Excerpt: conclusion]
"All families and children experience transitions as they move through the educational system. Transitioning between service delivery systems such as EI and ECSE can be particularly stressful for families and children with disabilities (Lovett & Haring, 2003). The transition framework described by Rous and colleagues (2007) reminds us to focus our transition efforts on the interactions and relationships among all levels of the child’s ecological system (e.g., child, family, provider, program, and community) to promote the child’s successful transition. The family-centered practice approach encourages professionals to empower families to use their natural social supports to address both the child’s and the family’s needs (Dunst, Trivette, & Deal, 1994a; Hanson & Lynch, 2004). Demographics of today’s families indicate that a large proportion of children spend time in out-of-home care while both parents work (Children’s Defense Fund, 2003). Community child care centers may be overlooked as appropriate settings for EI and ECSE services delivery. However, when EI and ECSE agencies partner with community child care centers, they have an opportunity to build on existing family supports while minimizing transition issues at age 3 years. The vignettes presented in this article illustrated ways in which an EI agency, an LEA, and community child care centers could collaborate to promote family-centered transition practices that result in seamless, stress-free transitions for children and families." (p.28)
Empowering Families During the Early Intervention Planning Process [Excerpt: conclusion]
"Parents need to be empowered to be active members in the early intervention process as parental participation benefits the child and is related to increased child achievement. Satisfaction is achieved when parents are active and are equal members of the early intervention team. Professionals play an important role in helping parents have a positive early intervention experience.
Preparation prior to the early intervention team meeting increases a parent’s confidence in being a strong advocate for their child. Parents are experts on their child and should be treated as such. Structuring the meeting to include a comfortable environment, facilitating equal participation, and following an agenda can ensure that child-focused objectives are met. Parents may personalize the meetings by using photographs, scrapbooks, portfolios, brochures, or electronic presentations. Increasing parent involvement in the early intervention process is key to successful outcomes for each child with disabilities." (p.56)
Specific Learning Disability and Its Newest Definition: Which Is Comprehensive? and Which Is Insufficient? [abstract]
The American Psychiatric Association’s proposed definition of specific learning disability (“specific learning disorder”) for the DSM-5 reflects current thinking and best practice in learning disabilities. It continues the core conceptualization of learning disability (LD) as well as proposes identification criteria to supplant the discredited aptitude–achievement discrepancy formula. Improvements can be found along with long-standing and new controversies about the nature of LD. The proposed definition both provides a model of a currently acceptable definition and reflects critical issues in the operationalization of LD that the field continues to neglect.
The Effects of Educational Policy and Local Context on Special Education Students’ Experiences of School Removal and Transition [abstract]
This article examines school removals and transitions among nine special education students. First, the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the local school discipline policy and special education contexts are discussed. Next, drawing from participants’ narrative accounts, the ways in which policy mandates and contextual conditions shaped their individual experiences are examined. Findings reveal the significance of IDEA and the profound impact of educational policies on students having academic and disciplinary difficulties. I argue for further examinations of the “on-the-ground” effects of educational policies and for students and their families to have more power in school accountability.
[excerpt from Implications section]
"Researchers and policy makers should address any ways in which IDEA and/or its implementation lead to excessive, unwarranted, or even questionable exclusionary discipline practices. Furthermore, with the current emphasis on graduation rates, it would be timely for policy makers and school district personnel to more closely examine school discipline policy. In zero-tolerance cases, IDEA defers to local school discipline policy which typically mandates expulsion. However, research shows that conditions beyond young people’s control—in both schools and communities—can greatly contribute to why some engage in activities that can lead to expulsion (Payne & Brown, 2010). Although serious infractions must be met with decisive responses, cutting troubled young people off from educational opportunity is unconscionable. These youth are among those most in need of the stability and future opportunities that formal education can offer." (p.838)
Impartial Hearings under the IDEA: Legal Issues and Answers [introduction]
This Question and Answer document is specific to impartial hearing officers (IHOs) and the impartial hearings that they conduct under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). It does not cover the IHO’s remedial authority, which is the subject of separate comprehensive coverage. The sources are limited to the pertinent IDEA legislation and regulations, court decisions and the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education’s (OSEP) policy letters that the author’s research has revealed. Thus, the answers are subject to revision or qualification based on 1) applicable state laws; 2) additional legal sources beyond those cited; and 3) independent interpretation of the cited and additional pertinent legal sources. The items are organized into various subject categories within two successive broad groups—hearing officer issues and hearing/decision issues.
Note: this reflects the contemporary state of relevant laws and regulations as of December 31, 2012.
The “New” Section 504: Student Issues in the Wake of the ADAAA [abstract]
School leaders are familiar with the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, but they also need to be legally literate about Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. This need is particularly pressing in the wake of significant recent changes in Section 504 as a result of the Americans With Disabilities Amendments Act. This case illustrates the eligibility and entitlement of a student with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder under Section 504 before and after these amendments. Would you be able to take the legally correct course of action if you were Amy Davidson? Do you have legally current and defensible answers to the discussion questions?
Strategies for Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Diverse Students With Autism Spectrum Disorder [excerpt]
"...[T]his article [presents] culturally responsive practices that demonstrate how teachers can (a) increase their knowledge of ASD in the context of students’ diverse languages and cultures; (b) partner with families to share understanding of ASD symptomatology and assist diverse families in accessing needed services and resources; and (c) implement best-practices multicultural teaching and assessment strategies in the classroom for all students, with particular implications for diverse students with ASD. These “how to” strategies can assist professionals in lessening the negative impact of disproportionate representation for diverse populations, specifically, for diverse students with ASD."(p. 168)
The article discusses and illustrates culturally-responsive strategies, including questions teachers can pose regarding ASD and culture. The authors also address strategies to build family-school connections with diverse families of students with ASD.
Sustaining Programs of School, Family, and Community Partnerships A Qualitative Longitudinal Study of Two Districts [abstract]
This study draws from four years of qualitative case study data to describe how programmatic and district factors interacted to affect reform sustainability in two school districts—one urban and the other suburban. These districts have been implementing a reform developed by the National Network of Partnership Schools (NNPS) for over a decade. NNPS assists schools, districts, and state departments of education to develop comprehensive programs of school, family, and community partnerships. Findings suggest that reform characteristics, specifically the evidence base, costs, and flexibility of the NNPS reform, and district leadership, specifically district leaders’ reform knowledge, professional influence, and reform focus converged to explain, in part, the case districts’ success in sustaining the reform. Implications of these findings for reform developers and leaders are discussed.
Challenges in Interpreting Accountability Results for Schools’ Facilitation of Parent Involvement Under IDEA [abstract]
Parents’ involvement in their child’s education has been an important tenet of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Under the special education accountability system that went into effect in 2005, states have been required to report annually to the federal government on the percentage of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that schools facilitated parent involvement. This study investigated the variability of states’ reported results owing to states’ different choices with regard to items, metrics, and standards used to calculate their percentage on the indicator. Findings indicated that the application of different methodologies could result in reported percentages that vary by as much as 40 percentage points. It is argued that when reported results do not mean the same thing across states, the accountability system may fail in its mission to provide stakeholders with clear information to evaluate program performance and guide improvement efforts.
published online Nov 2012; forthcoming in print as of Jan 2013
States' Accountability and Progress in Serving Young Children With Disabilities [abstract]
Since the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), there has been a growing focus on improving the quality of programs for children with disabilities and measuring the results/outcomes of those programs. Across the country, IDEA Part C Programs for Infants and Toddlers and IDEA Part B, Section 619 Preschool Programs have been developing, implementing, and improving their accountability systems, and in spite of significant fiscal limitations, the states have produced meaningful data demonstrating both program improvement and positive outcomes for the children and families being served. This article uses trend data reported by the states over the past 4 years to provide a national picture of the progress they have made, the challenges they have faced, and the improvement strategies they have undertaken. The lessons they have learned are relevant to the broader early childhood community. A discussion about implications for the future is included.
Identification of Learning Disabilities Implications of Proposed DSM-5 Criteria for School-Based Assessment [abstract]
This article examines the recommended eligibility determination for learning disabilities (LD) in both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act and the proposed changes in diagnostic criteria in the DSM-5. The focus is on the inclusion of the criterion of responsiveness to intervention (RTI) and the implications for practice of school psychologists and general and special education teachers. The research base on RTI for diagnostic purposes is examined, and considerations of changing roles for clinicians and school-based practitioners are discussed.
Comorbidity of LD and ADHD: Implications of DSM-5 for Assessment and Treatment [abstract]
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disability (LD) can co-occur for a significant minority of children with each disorder. A total of 17 studies (2001–2011) examining ADHD-LD comorbidity were reviewed, revealing a higher mean comorbidity rate (45.1%) than has been obtained previously. Higher comorbidity may be the result of including students with writing disorders, not just reading and/or math disabilities. Proposed DSM-5 criteria for both disorders will likely affect comorbidity rates; however, it is unclear whether such rates will increase or decrease. Regardless of the specific impact of DSM revisions, academic skill and/or performance deficits should be assessed for students with ADHD as part of screening, comprehensive evaluation, and treatment monitoring. Comprehensive intervention services for students with comorbid ADHD and LD will require empirically supported treatment strategies that address both disorders and that are implemented across school and home settings.
IEP/IFSP Facilitation: Practical Insights and Programmatic Considerations This document briefly summarizes practical insights and promising practices for IEP/IFSP facilitation, collected from a broad review of facilitation and special education literature. Among the highlight are strategies that can be used prior to and during a meeting as well as considerations for those designing and managing facilitation programs.
A Comprehensive Comparison of the IDEA and Section 504/ADA This document provides a comparison of the student-related similarities and differences between IDEA and two related acts, Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Comparisons are provided in tabular format, with the three acts across the top and various criteria listed down the side of each. Criteria are grouped by nature: groups include Administering Agency, Institutional Requirements, Student Identification, Procedural Safeguards, Discipline, Enforcement, and Litigation.
Tuition and Related Reimbursement under the IDEA: A Decisional Checklist [Excerpt, p.786]
"This checklist provides, in flowchart–like form, the criteria for reimbursement of tuition and related expenses under the IDEA along with the applicable statutory, regulatory, and case law citations."
The checklist identifies three steps, with specific questions to determine the possibility of reimbursement:
A. Preliminary equities step
B. Appropriateness step
C. Final equities step
Impartial Hearings for Public School Students under Section 504: A State-by-State Survey [Excerpt, p.3]
The purposes of this article are (a) to canvass the Section 504 legislation, regulations, and OCR interpretations specific to impartial hearings; and (b) to determine, via a national survey, the current practices of the state education agencies (SEAs) for the 50 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.) in terms of meeting the Section 504 requirement for an impartial hearing for the two identified categories of Section 504–eligible students.
Part I of this article provides an introductory overview of the major sources of confusion—one based on the overlap with the IDEA and the other based on the limited coverage in the literature—concerning impartial hearings under Section 504. As a focused legal framework, Part II summarizes the Section 504 legislation, regulations, and OCR interpretations specific to impartial hearings. As the central section, Part III presents the methodology and findings of a survey of the current practices, including state laws and policies, of the 51 SEAs (including D.C.) for Section 504 hearings. Finally, Part IV provides a concluding discussion recommending that states review and revise these practices in light of the OCR interpretations, relevant case law, and other pertinent
[Excerpt from concluding Discussion, p.16]
"In sum, impartial hearings under Section 504 merit much more attention in both the professional literature and in state policymaking. Although no single solution is necessarily applicable to all states, careful consideration is clearly warranted. In general, adopting a state law or at least official policy would appear to be in the public interest. The process of such adoption should include concerted and systematic attention to (a) the differences between double–covered and Section 504 –only students, (b) the courts' interpretation of the IDEA exhaustion provision for the particular jurisdiction, and (c) the competing interests, including available resources and applicable values, for the jurisdiction. Finally, SEAs need to include local stakeholders in terms of both parents and district personnel in both the development and dissemination of the policies for impartial hearings under Section 504 so that disputes about eligibility, FAPE, and other such claims are subject to effective resolution rather than costly compounding."
Learning together with parents of children with disabilities: Bringing parent-professional partnership education to a new level "This article reviews a new approach taken by one teacher education program, through which parents of students with disabilities are engaged as part of a teacher education course on parental involvement for students with disabilities. Comparing this course to other, primarily text-based versions of teacher preparation classes, the authors explore the advantages of making families a part of teacher education. The article includes important considerations for universities preparing new educators, as well as districts or schools looking for induction strategies to improve family engagement."
[Summary from Harvard Family Research Project, _Family Engagement and Children with Disabilities:
A Resource Guide for Educators and Parents_]
Working With American Indian Students and Families: Disabilities, Issues, and Interventions [Abstract]
Although most American Indian students are educated in the public school system, there is limited literature regarding (a) how general and special educators can effectively meet the unique educational needs of these students or (b) what strategies educators can use while working with their families. Additionally, there are limited resources available regarding how American Indians view special education, disability issues, and the relationship between school and family. The worldview of American Indians differs from mainstream America, which has led to the overrepresentation of American Indian students in special education programs. This article provides culturally responsive research-based practices to help foster school and family relationships and improve the educational outcomes of American Indian students.
Predictors of parents perception toward the IEP meeting UMI Number: 3507702
"In the field of educational leadership, as well as special education, parental participation is paramount given that federal law has mandated that schools provide and show evidence that they foster parental participation. This quantitative, non-experimental study examined the relationship between level of education, marital status, socioeconomic status, parents' experience in special education, and student's disability category and their parents' perception of the individual education plan (IEP) meeting. The theoretical framework of this study encompassed the history of special education with a timeline of the evolution of federal and state leadership roles, laws, and litigation from 1958 to the present. Specific to this study was the provision of parental rights and participation in the individual education planning (IEP) process. The participants for this study consist of parents/guardians of students receiving special education services k-12. The survey instrument used in this study targeted various demographics. The study consisting of 51 respondents revealed a negative perception of the IEP meeting from those parents that reported being married and with 5 or more years of experience in special education. Through the identification and examination of specific demographic factors, school districts (urban, suburban, rural), and building levels (elementary, middle, high school) will be able to improve upon breaking down negative barriers that may impede an equal parent-professional partnership."
Family Engagement and Children with Disabilities: A Resource Guide for Educators and Parents This resource guide presents an annotated bibliography on partnerships between families and schools.
From p.3: "This annotated bibliography describes resources that can help parents and educators facilitate a comfortable and supportive partnership in the interest of successful outcomes for children with disabilities. The research reports, journal articles, and examples of best practices and practical tools included in this guide suggest methods of developing positive, timely, and productive collaboration between schools and families so that they can work together to ensure better services for students in their care.
The resources in this guide are grouped into the following categories, which reflect common areas of focus that concern families and educators while striving to meet the needs of children with disabilities:
* Families as advocates
* Family roles in assessment and intervention
* Families as partners in student learning
A New Multicultural Population: Creating Effective Partnerships With Multiracial Families [Abstract]
Multiracial families make up the fastest growing demographic in the United States. Approximately 9% of the U.S. population is multiracial, and it is estimated that the numbers will climb to 21% by 2050. With this increasing population, educators have a new responsibility to meet the needs of these families. Education must begin to form partnerships with families to increase the social and academic achievement of children from multiracial backgrounds. The purpose of this article is to (a) identify the uniqueness of multiracial students and families, (b) provide recommendations regarding improving multiracial family partnerships, and (c) offer best practices and strategies for working effectively with multiracial children and youth in schools.
Involving parents of students with special needs: 25 ready to use strategies This book offers twenty-five strategies through which schools can encourage and support parents' involvement.
The author groups these strategies in chapters 2-7 by communication medium (in-person, telephone, written) while chapter 8 emphasizes home-based activities. The closing two chapters move from challenges and obstacles to the value of planning.
[From publisher's website]
"In this teacher-friendly resource, Jill C. Dardig provides 25 ready-to-use techniques for involving parents in the education of their children. Both general and special education teachers in Grades PreK–12 can use these strategies to reach the parents of students with a wide range of learning needs, including cognitive, emotional/behavioral, social, sensory, and physical disabilities, as well as the parents of typically developing students. Involving Parents of Students With Special Needs anticipates the challenges to parent involvement and provides step-by-step directions, sample materials, and tips for
- Using letters, telephone, email, newsletters, and
progress reports to communicate with parents
- Conducting successful parent conferences and
- Connecting parents with needed resources
- Helping parents teach their children at home
- Dealing with home/school conflict situations
- Preparing a parent involvement action plan
This practical guide helps teachers and parents work together to give students with special needs the necessary support to succeed in school."
Labeling effects on special education and general education teachers in both student attributions and conflict resolution UMI Number: 1512313
"Understanding how labels and prior training affect teachers of students with a disability is a step towards creating effective educational environments. There were two goals of the study. The first aim was to examine how teacher training (special education versus general education training) and labeling of students (either as having a label of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or having no label) affected teachers' memory for specific attributes of a hypothetical student. Furthermore, the secondary aim was to identify whether teacher training and label type influence how the teachers would respond in a student-initiated conflict. Depending on the type of memory attribute, hindering or facilitative, special education and general education recalled a different amount of information in the labeling conditions. Intrusion errors revealed that participants tended to remember more hindering items. General education teachers tended to endorse more mediation approach overall when compared to Special Education Teachers. Findings of this study inform educators' current knowledge regarding disability training, including the role of field-based training, the use of labels and how teachers' training may affect how they handle classroom conflict with students with a disability."
Collaborating for our children’s future: Mediation of special education disputes This article reviews the emergence of mediation in special education disputes, situating it within a continuum of dispute resolution processes. The authors discuss the trends toward collaboration in federal legislation from 1975's Education for All Handicapped Children Act through IDEA's introduction in 1990 and subsequent reauthorizations.
The articles closes with a look to the future, including the expansion of facilitated IEPs and IFSPs.
Examining the Impact of Special Education Dispute Resolution in Pennsylvania UMI Number: 3510696
[Excerpts from abstract]
"If a disagreement arises between parents and their school district, either party may request a special education due process hearing. However, several alternate options are available and encouraged for parties to consider for resolution of conflicts prior to the court proceeding. The purpose of this phenomenological study was to examine the rationale used by parents or school officials when electing to file formal due process complaints in conjunction with or instead of attempting to resolve disputes using the available alternate dispute resolution options available in Pennsylvania. The researcher also explored the manner in which disputes were resolved and the methods employed to rebuild the parent/school relationship.
Data was collected through surveys of family members and school officials who participated in dispute resolution in Pennsylvania during fiscal year 2008-2009. Triangulation was achieved by reviewing the findings of ninety-nine hearings held during that fiscal year. Analysis of responses was organized into themes resulting in the identification of common themes across groups of participants. Those themes included (1) Lack of communication, (2) Non-discriminatory evaluation, and (3) Training and knowledge.
Results indicate that open and on-going communication is an area where both groups agree that work needs to continue so that the parent-school partnership is strengthened. A second common theme was the need for a clearly defined and timely provision for non-discriminatory evaluation to determine a child's eligibility for services so those services can be implemented without delay. Finally, on-going training for families and school personnel was expressed as a desire by all participant groups. This training should be focused on the state and federal legislation related to special education, research-based programs and services, conflict resolution and developing a family and school partnership."
Biculturization: Developing culturally responsive approaches to family participation This article describes biculturization as an effective process for planning an IEP or an intervention. They illustrate the process through a merger of the McGill Action PLanning System (MAPS) with an indigenous Hawaiian social work process known as 'Ohana Conferencing.
"Biculturalization consists of merging a Western or
mainstream collaborative planning process with practices
that are familiar to individuals from different cultures... consists of five steps:
• identify the important values in the ethnic culture which can be used in the merged approach;
• choose a Western approach with a theoretical framework and values that are compatible to the ethnic cultural values of participants;
• analyze an indigenous approach familiar to the ethnic participants in order to determine what can be reinforced and integrated into the Western approach;
• develop a framework and approach that integrates the values and techniques of the ethnic culture and the indigenous and Western approaches; and
• apply the Western intervention by explaining the approach and how it reinforces cultural values and indigenous approaches."
Examining the Impact of Early Intervention, Parent Involvement and Family Characteristics on Preschool Special Education Student Outcomes over Time UMI Number: 3495232
[Excerpts from abstract]
"The study included secondary data analysis to examine the impact of several factors, including the Early Intervention program, demographic factors and potential mediating factors on preschool special education student outcomes. The Pre-elementary Education Longitudinal Study was utilized to answer the following research questions:
1) What is the effect of Part C Early Intervention on the pre-academic achievement of preschool special education students?
2) What factors are related to parent involvement?
3) What is the relationship of parent involvement to the pre-academic achievement of preschool special education students?
Linear Mixed Models were used to test the long term effects of Early Intervention and parent involvement on student outcomes and the effect of Early Intervention on parent involvement. Although Early Intervention did not predict parent involvement, results indicated that the program had a positive significant impact on cognitive student outcomes. Children who received EI were more likely to score higher on the cognitive tests..."
"Implications are that early intervention is effective in increasing cognitive development levels which can lead to positive school outcomes such as higher grade point averages and graduation rates in the future. Since parent involvement appeared to be an important factor in improving student achievement, it was suggested that policies such as IDEA encourage interventionists to work collaboratively with families to help children reach their full potential."
Disability and the Education System [Summary in journal]
Aron and Loprest trace the evolution of the special education system in the United States from its origins in the civil rights movement of the mid-twentieth century. They note the dual character of federal legislation, which both guarantees eligible children with disabilities the right to a “free, appropriate public education in the least restrictive setting” and establishes a federal funding program to help meet this goal. They then review the types of services and accommodations these children receive from infancy through young adulthood.
The special education system has given children with disabilities much greater access to public education, established an infrastructure for educating them, helped with the earlier identi?cation of disabilities, and promoted greater inclusion of these children alongside their nondisabled peers. Despite these advances, many problems remain, including the over- and under-identi?cation of certain subgroups of students, delays in identifying and serving students, and bureaucratic, regulatory, and ?nancial barriers that complicate the program for everyone involved.
More important, the authors show that special education students still lag behind their nondisabled peers in educational achievements, are often held to lower expectations, are less likely to take the full academic curriculum in high school, and are more likely to drop out of school. Only limited evidence is available on the effectiveness of speci?c special education services or on how to improve student achievement for this important subgroup of students.
Improving the system will require better ways of understanding and measuring both ends of the special education continuum, namely, what services special education children need and receive, and what academic outcomes these students achieve. Without stronger evidence linking these two aspects of the system, Aron and Loprest argue, researchers will be unable to gauge the ef?cacy of the services now being delivered or to formulate effective reforms to the system as a whole.
Handbook of Leadership and Administration for Special Education [From publisher's website]
This book brings together for the first time research informing leadership practice in special education from preschool through transition into post-secondary settings. It provides comprehensive coverage of 1) disability policy 2) leadership knowledge, 3) school reform, and 4) effective educational leadership practices. Broader in scope than previous books, it provides in-depth analysis by prominent scholars from across the disciplines of both general and special education leadership. Coverage includes historical roots, policy and legal perspectives, and content supporting collaborative and instructional leadership that support the administration of special education.
I. The Context and Development of Leadership for Special Education
1. Leadership for Student Performance in an Era of Accountability Martha L. Thurlow, Rachel F. Quenemoen, and Sheryl S. Lazarus
2. Conceptual and Historical Foundations of Special Education Administration Barbara Pazey and James R. Yates
3. Expanding the Leadership Framework: An Alternate View of Professional Standards Mary Lynn Boscardin and Carl Lashley
4. Developing Educational Leaders for the Realities of Special Education in the 21st Century Jean B. Crockett
II. Leadership, Policy and School Reform
5. Special Education Law for Leaders and Administrators of Special Education Mitchell L. Yell, Susan S. Thomas, and Antonis Katsiyannis
6. Financing Education for Children with Special Needs Preston Green, Bruce Baker, and Matthew J. Ramsey
7. Special Education and School Choice: A Special Leadership Challenge Julie Mead and Preston Green
8. Disability, Difference, and Justice: Strong Democratic Leadership for Undemocratic Times Thomas Skrtic
III. Collaborative Leadership for Special Education in Multicultural Contexts
9. System-wide Leadership for Culturally-Responsive Education Elizabeth Kosleski and Jennifer J. Huber
10. Inclusive School Reform: Distributed Leadership across the Change Process Bonnie Billingsley
11. Collaborative Decision-Making in Multicultural Contexts John Hoover, Amy Eppolito, Janette Klingner, and Leonard Baca
12. Leadership and Collaboration in Home-School Partnerships Beth Harry
13. Building Trust and Responding to Conflict in Special Education Barbara J. Lake and Art Stewart
IV: Instructional Leadership and the Evaluation of Educational Outcomes Section
14. Leading to Improve Teacher Effectiveness: Implications for Practice, Reform, Research, and Policy Donald Deshler and Jake Cornett
15. Teacher Quality and Effectiveness in an Era of Accountability: Challenges and Solutions in Special Education? Mary Brownell, Bonnie S. Billingsley, James McLeskey, and Paul Sindelar
16. Leadership and Instruction: Evidence-based Practices in Special Education Bryan G. Cook and Garnett J. Smith
17. School Leadership and School-wide Positive Behavior Support George Sugai, Breda V. O’Keeffe, Robert H. Horner, and Timothy J. Lewis
18. Responsive Instructional Leadership for Early Intervention Patricia Snyder, Crystal D. Crowe, and Robert Crow
19. Leadership for Transition to Postsecondary Settings David W. Test, Valerie L. Mazzotti, and April L. Mustian
V: Challenges for Educational Leaders Section
20. Challenges for Leaders in the Not-so-New Era of Standards Margaret J. McLaughlin, Amy F. Smith, and Tracy G. Wilkinson
Federal Policy on Disproportionality in Special Education: Is it Moving us Forward? [Abstract]
Monitoring requirements in the 1997 amendments to and 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) acknowledged the existence and extent of racial/ethnic disproportionality in special education, especially when, in 2004, Congress designated this concern among the top three priority areas for monitoring and enforcement of the law. However, federal interpretations of the 2004 requirements have created confusion at the State (SEA) and Local Education Agency (LEA) levels. This article analyzes data from state Annual Performance Reports to assess the progress made in identifying disproportionality. Though high levels of disproportionality remain, an increasing number of states are finding no LEAs with disproportionality when it must be shown that the disproportionality was caused by inappropriate identification. The analyses provided suggest that federal interpretations of IDEA 2004 have not been effective in addressing disproportionate representation in special education. Recommendations for improving policy to remedy this serious problem are provided.
"Systemic Remedies for Systemic Failure
OSEP must take definitive steps to provide uniformity in
identifying and reporting disproportionality by the states,
eliminating inconsistencies in policies and assuring alignment of Congressional intent in the IDEA that states and districts address all “inappropriate” contributing factors and take meaningful action toward prevention. To that end, a practical method for local data collection and interpretation of data in annual public reporting down to the district level is needed. Comprehensive intervention programs are advised to address interactions of student characteristics, teacher capabilities and attitudes, and unanalyzed sources of structural inequity and racial stereotype. Schools should implement culturally responsive approaches to improve academic and behavioral outcomes in general and to reduce measured inequity. The OSEP mandate for the collection, monitoring, and reporting of disaggregated data (as per the IDEA) should be continued.
Recommendations for Policy
The following policy recommendations are offered to improve methods for identifying and the disproportionate
representation of minority students in special education
identification, more restrictive placements, and school
discipline." [Eleven policy recommendations are offered.]
Litigation and Students With Disabilities: A Persistent Concern This article reviews recent litigation related to students with disabilities; it presents themes as well as five tables summarizing the facts and decisions in specific cases gathered by topic (see abstract for list).
Special education litigation remains a volatile area with significant practice implications. A review of the 2010 case law in the Special Educator identified discipline (manifestation determination, seclusion and restraints, harassment), evaluation/RTI, and postsecondary transition as specific areas of concern. School administrators should keep abreast of these developments to ensure that the rights of students with disabilities are observed, educational benefits are attained, and potential liability is minimized.
Mediation of Special Education Disputes in Pennsylvania [Excerpt from Introduction]
This Article proceeds in four parts: first, it explores the power imbalance present when an attorney is prohibited from attending mediation. Second, this Article explains that attorney participation is essential for due process protection and how prohibition of such results is improper administrative rulemaking in Pennsylvania. Third, this Article rejects the unsubstantiated claim that having an attorney present in mediation creates an adversarial environment that is antithetical to effective mediation. Lastly, this Article argues for various proposals that could be adopted to seamlessly incorporate attorneys into the mediation process, providing parents with more equal bargaining power.
The 5-Point Plan: Fostering Successful Partnerships With Families of Students With Disabilities This article outlines five key points for educators to create effective relationships with families, providing both discussion and illustrations for each:
1. Be positive, proactive, and solution oriented.
2. Respect families' roles and cultural backgrounds in their children's lives.
3. Communicate consistently, listen to families' concerns, and work together.
4. Consider simple, natural supports that meet individual needs of students.
5. Empower families with knowledge and opportunities for involvement in the context of students' global needs.
Concrete strategies are offered for each; these are the eight related to Point 1:
"Point 1: Be positive, proactive, and solution oriented
* Send home a concise, easy-to-read description of your classroom expectations at the beginning of the year. List some of the potential consequences for meeting or not meeting expectations (e.g., reinforcers and punishers).
* Call families during the first week of school to share at least one positive thing their child has done at school.
* Share three positive comments about students for every one negative comment.
* Make a regular homework schedule, so families know what to expect each night and can set up a routine (e.g., 20 minutes of reading per night + math worksheet on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and spelling on Tuesdays and Thursdays). Then, send home a description of your homework policy and schedule.
* Ask families to sign and return cover sheet on the items above, so you know they have received them.
* Send home clear directions with homework assignments instead of relying on students to remember directions you gave during class.
* Research specific disabilities of students in your class, while keeping in mind the fact that all students, even those who have the same disability, are unique.
* When discussing problems through notes or phone, always present ideas for possible solutions (e.g., "Tomorrow, we are going to try ____ to be more successful")."
The Means Justify the Ends: Structural Due Process in Special Education Law [abstract]
This Article addresses the theoretical and functional role of due process in special education law under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA"). Thirty years ago, the Supreme Court interpreted the IDEA to grant very limited substantive rights but to provide robust procedural protections for disabled children and their families. Since that decision, the federal courts have been in an unrecognized state of disarray when analyzing procedural violations under the IDEA.
This Article looks to the historical context in which the IDEA was drafted and interpreted, in the midst of the so-called due process revolution, to better understand the meaning of its proceduralist values. The Article revisits the once lively academic discussion of the nature and function of procedural civil rights protections in the education context that engaged scholars during the 1970s and 1980s, updating that analysis to apply to current special education law.
The Article applies the historical and theoretical insights from those earlier inquiries to develop a structural due process vision of the IDEA, distinguishing two separate stages at which due process protections apply under the Act, and deriving three distinct principles that constrain the school district's decisionmaking process in developing an individualized educational program for a disabled student: collaboration, individualization, and contractualization.
Finally, it argues that this theoretical inquiry has significant practical import because the three structural due process principles map precisely onto a recent amendment to the IDEA such that the theoretical vision described in the Article is directly relevant to deciphering the procedural challenges raised under the IDEA that have bedeviled the courts for more than three decades.
How the IDEA and the Fostering Connections Act Can Work Together to Ensure School Stability and Seamless Transitions for Children with Disabilities in the Child Welfare System This brief explains how two federal laws--IDEA and the Fostering Connections Act--can help advocates "ensure school stability and smooth transitions" for children with disabilities in foster care. Presented in a Q&A format, the brief addresses fundamental issues. It also includes three case studies for illustration purposes.
"Clearly, children with disabilities that affect their learning face significant challenges in the school setting. The IDEA represents a significant federal commitment to help states assist these children to achieve at high levels and to prepare youth for higher education, employment, and successful integration into their communities. These challenges increase geometrically when the children have experienced abuse or neglect, are in the care or custody of the child welfare system, or experience placement instability. The good news is that advocates for these children have many legal tools that can help to eliminate these challenges and barriers – but only if those advocates inform themselves about these legal requirements and advocate effectively and forcefully for the children in their care."
Twelve Ways to Incorporate Strengths-Based Planning into the IEP Process [Abstract]
"The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act 2004 (IDEA) requires public schools to assure that parents of students with disabilities have the opportunity to participate in Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings. Strengths-based IEPs focus on student strengths and abilities, rather than weaknesses and disabilities, in preparing parents and teachers for the IEP meeting, presenting information at the meeting, and documenting the meeting in writing. As a special education administrator for more than 27 years, the author has experience in working with parents from the strengths-based perspective, including encouraging parents to participate in the IEP process. In 1994 the author, along with parents of students with disabilities, developed a checklist for parents and public school teachers that focused on the strengths-based approach and was intended to encourage parents to participate actively in IEP meetings. Twelve techniques for reducing conflict and encouraging parents to participate in the IEP planning process at the middle and high school level are presented and described."
"There are three components of the strengths-based IEP process: preparation, presentation, and documentation. The first, preparation, involves preparing the IEP participants, especially the student’s parents, for the meeting. The second, presentation, involves focusing on the student’s strengths and using strengths-based terminology at the meeting. The third, documentation, involves using a strengths-based or ability-based perspective in writing the IEP."
Common-Law Interpretation of Appropriate Education: The Road Not Taken in Rowley [Abstract/Intro]
"Thirty years old in 2012, Board of Education v. Rowley^ remains the Supreme Court's sole pronouncement on the meaning of the duty to provide appropriate education for children with disabilities. This duty is the central one imposed on school districts by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),2 the law that governs special education services in the public schools of the United States. Rowley is known as the case that established a "some benefit" or "floor of opportunity" standard for the services school districts must provide to children who have disabilities.3 But the some-benefit approach is by no means the only one the Court could have adopted. It could have endorsed the view of the lower courts that each child with a disability must be given the opportunity to achieve his or her potential commensurate with the opportunity offered other children.4 Or it could have adopted a standard based on achievement of the child's full potential or the opportunity to become self-sufficient, or given some other meaning to the statutory term.
What this Article explores is a different possibility: that the Court not have taken the case in the first place, or simply decided it on its facts without making any grand pronouncement about the interpretation of appropriate education. The result would have been caselaw development of the statutory term's meaning in line with the evolution of the meaning of terms in other vaguely worded statutes. Scholars have labeled this a common-law approach because of its analogy to common-law development of negligence or other non-statutory legal standards.5 Under this approach, competing definitions of appropriate education may have arisen in different courts. Meanings that were never suggested in Rowley might have come forward. The proportional maximization standard urged by the lower courts in Rowley might have gained ascendancy, or it might have been rejected over a run of cases due to problems with workability or other difficulties. Only after a period of years would an observer be able to look back and see where the path of development led. Then with or without Supreme Court guidance, a clear meaning for the statutory term might emerge.
This Article lays out the reasons that a common-law approach would have been the superior one. Persuasive analogies to other statutes support it; moreover, Rowley's reasoning in reaching the some-benefit standard is highly unsatisfactory. Had a common-law approach led to proportional maximization, there would have been good justification for it, but had it led elsewhere, there might have been justification for that, too.
Of course, the Court in Rowley rejected common-law development for the appropriate education duty, and established the some-benefit test as the standard. Interestingly, however, many lower courts have marched along on something that strongly resembles a common-law road, but that cannot be given that name because of the Supreme Court's decision. This Article concludes by pointing to lower court cases that stretch the limits of the some-benefit standard and may represent the emergence of new approaches, as the traditional mode of common-law development would allow. Much has been written about Rowley, most of it critical of the case.6 But the possibility and prospects of a common-law approach to appropriate education remain undeveloped. The time for the approach just may have arrived.
Part I of this Article provides a brief introduction to IDEA and Rowley. Part II discusses common-law interpretation of statutory provisions and sketches the outlines of a common-law approach to appropriate education. Part III discusses appropriate education as proportional maximization of educational opportunity, a meaning of the term that might have received favor had the courts been given the opportunity for commonlaw development. Part IV asks whether congressional ratification of Rowley has foreclosed judicial approaches to appropriate education other than the one adopted in that case, and concludes that they remain open. Finally, Part V points to caselaw under IDEA that suggests a more sophisticated understanding of appropriate education than a narrow reading of Rowley might indicate. It contends that these cases may represent the beginnings of common-law interpretation of the concept."