Special education consists of specially designed services available for students with disabilities, and should be available across placements. Students with the most significant disabilities continue to be taught in restrictive settings, despite accumulating evidence suggesting their special education services can be delivered effectively in general education settings. Every individualized education program (IEP) must contain a statement describing how the student will be provided a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. The present study used content analysis to examine least restrictive environment statements of 88 students' individualized education programs (IEPs) to determine what factors, including supplementary aids and services, were considered in making placement decisions. We further analyzed the classes and activities in which students participated in general education settings. Findings reveal supplementary aids and services were not considered in placement decisions, although a number of factors centering on curricular considerations, environmental demands, student deficit, and personnel requirements were noted in making placement decisions. We further found students primarily participated in non-academic instruction while in general education settings. Implications for policy, practice, and research are included.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Mandatory quarantine upon exposure to Covid-19 results in a substantial number of lost days of school. We hypothesized that implementation of a state-wide test-to-stay (TTS) program would allow more students to participate in in-person learning, and not cause additional clusters of Covid-19 cases due to in-school transmission. METHODS For the 2020/2021 academic year, Massachusetts implemented an opt-in TTS program, in which students exposed to Covid-19 in school are tested each school day with a rapid antigen test. If negative, students may participate in school-related activities that day. Testing occurs daily for a duration of 7 calendar days after exposure. Here, we report the results from the first thirteen weeks of the program. RESULTS 2,298 schools signed up for TTS, and 504,167 individuals out of a total population of 860,457 consented. During the first thirteen weeks with complete data, 1,959 schools activated the program at least once for 102,373 individual, exposed students. Out of 328,271 tests performed, 2,943 positive cases were identified (per person positivity rate, 2.9%, 95% CI 2.8%, 3.0%). A minimum of 325,328 and a maximum of 497,150 days of in-person school were saved through participation in the program. CONCLUSIONS Daily, rapid on-site antigen testing is a safe and feasible alternative to mandatory quarantine and can be used to maximize safe in-person learning time during the pandemic.

Supplementary aids and services have been a provision in special education law since PL 94-142, however, almost no guidance has been provided to help teams make decisions about their appropriate selection and use. In this exploratory study, we explore the types of supplementary aids and services selected for students with significant support needs using a conventional content analysis of Individual Education Program (IEPs) from 88 students in grades K-12.Results illustrate the wide variation in types of supplementary aids and services chosen for students overall. Curricular accommodations and personnel supports were the most commonly identified supports, while supports to assist students to communicate and make meaning of curriculum (e.g., curricular modifications) were less common, as were less intrusive supports such as peer assisted learning. Implications for policy, practice, and research are provided.

This paper describes the requirements for real-time

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 while 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.