ABSTRACT
Trends in the supplementary aids and services (SAS) written in individualized education programs (IEPs) for students with significant disabilities (a) in different educational placements, (b) with and without behavior support plans (BSP), and (c) with and without complex communication needs (CCN) are examined using multivariate analysis of variance. Results show no significant differences in SAS for students across separate, resource, and inclusive placements. Students with BSPs had significantly more collaborative and behavior SAS than those without BSPs. Students with CCN had significantly more social-communication SAS than those whose IEPs indicated little to no communication support needs; however, 51.1% of students with CCN had no social-communication SAS. Findings raise concern around the extent to which SAS are considered before placement decisions, the high frequency of paraprofessional support for students with BSPs, and the low frequency of social-communication SAS written for students with CCN. Implications for policy, practice, and future research are provided.
Subject(s)
Disabled Persons , Intellectual Disability , Communication , Humans , StudentsABSTRACT
Parent input in individualized education program (IEP) development is the clear expectation in U.S. education law. Every IEP team must include parents, and their input must be equally considered when developing IEPs. The present study used content analysis of 88 IEPs of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities to explore team membership, concerns parents raised during IEP meetings, and evidence that parent concerns and priorities are reflected in IEP goals and supplementary aids and services. Findings reveal that although parents express a range of concerns and priorities, these are translated into goals or services only two thirds of the time. We provide implications of these findings for research and practice.