More than de minimis: FAPE in the Post Endrew F. Era

Abstract

Federal regulations for special education services have focused primarily on procedural issues since the Rowley decision, which held that Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) need only be reasonably calculated to yield educational benefit. However, the minimum threshold for benefit has changed with the recent Endrew F. decision as IEPs must yield more than de minimis progress. To ensure sufficient progress toward the achievement of ambitious goals, schools must develop IEPs that meet procedural and substantive requirements, employ interventions with clear evidence of effectiveness, effectively measure student response to services, and to communicate this information with parents/guardians so that they can actively participate in this process. Manuscripts invited for this special issue include investigations of IEP quality; co-teaching; intervention studies in reading, writing, and mathematics; meta-analytic findings regarding social studies education; and a discussion of the implications of Endrew F. for different student disability populations. These papers discuss challenges faced by stakeholders with vested interests in students with disabilities as well as areas of continued development and refinement in evidence-based practice.

A systematic review of intervention studies for young children with emotional and behavioral disorders: identifying the research base

“…At present, schools in the United States are only required to ‘consider’ the use of positive behaviour supports such as function‐based interventions. A reauthorisation of federal special education law may be necessary to ensure schools have the necessary resources to for this recommendation to be feasible in at least some educational settings (see McKenna and Brigham, 2021).…”

Reading Instruction for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Comparing Observations of Instruction to Student Reading Profiles

“…However, considering the shortage of highly qualified special educators and the conditions in which many of them work (see Bettini et al, 2021), it is no wonder that at least some schools face a significant challenge implementing tiered models of support with fidelity (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2017). Thus, stakeholders including those that draft and enact educational policies must respond to challenges faced by public education due to the unfunded mandates associated with FAPE (see McKenna & Brigham, 2021).…”

Triennial Evaluations: Divorcing the Means from the Ends

“…An additional element that requires consideration in triennial evaluations, as well as evaluations that occur more frequently, is the actual progress an individual is making on the educational goals declared in the IEP. Given the requirement that students show more than de minimis progress relative to their IEP goals, it seems that having the same goal appear in several IEPs should be a cause for alarm [2]. One reason that goals may appear across IEPs is that they are written so broadly that it is difficult or impossible to detect meaningful progress.…”

“…The twin pillars of special education in the United States are a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) that is delivered in the least restrictive environment (LRE). We previously argued that FAPE should be the driving force in a rational education system [1,2]. With the Endrew F. decision, demonstration of "appropriate" progress is now required for all students with disabilities [3].…”