Perceptions of the usefulness of the IEP by teachers of learning disabled and emotionally disturbed children

Abstract

The present study used questionnaires to examine the perceptions of the usefulness of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) by teachers of emotionally disturbed and learning disabled children. Teachers surveyed indicated that the IEP does have some general utility for them and their students. However, the majority of respondents also indicated that the IEP does not usually assist them in planning day-to-day instruction. Additionally, they do not refer to the actual IEP document very often, nor is it particularly accessible to them. It was concluded that the IEP will not qualitatively affect the education of handicapped students unless it guides the delivery of services on a daily basis.More has been written about the Individualized Education Program (IEP) than any other aspect of Public Law 94-142. The early IEP literature focused on the potential benefits of the IEP for handicapped learners, as well as on suggestions to teachers and administrators for implementing the IEP requirement. Most of the studies evaluating rates of success in implementing the IEP for handicapped children have focused on compliance (Salett & Henderson, 1980); that is, how well districts have fulfilled the letter of the law. Perhaps more important is school districts' success in meeting the spirit of the law; that is, have IEPs truly made a qualitative difference in the education of handicapped students?The present study examined perceptions of the usefulness of the IEP by teachers of emotionally disturbed (ED) and learning disabled (LD) children. It was an attempt to extend and expand the results of an earlier study by Morgan and Rhode (1983), who reported that teachers surveyed felt that the preparation of IEPs did help them organize their time, but that IEP preparation was time consuming and made little difference in the quality of education students received. METHODQuestionnaires were randomly distributed to 250 teachers of ED and LD students in Colorado, 150 of whom completed and returned them. Teachers completing questionnaires represented both elementary and secondary schools in both urban and rural districts.The IEP process in Colorado is similar to that in most states. Additionally, over half of the teachers certified in Colorado received their initial certification out of state and many have worked out of state. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the perceptions of teachers in Colorado are fairly similar to those of teachers nationwide. Table 1 presents the 10 questions teachers were asked concerning the usefulness of the IEP process and their responses to questions 1-6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe teachers surveyed indicated that the IEP does have some general utility for them and their students. A substantial majority responded that the IEP usually assists them in developing educational programs and most probably would continue to write

Physical Education for Students with Spina Bifida: Mothers’ Perspectives

“…These findings support the work of Dudley-Marling (1985) who twenty years ago suggested the PPP did not assist teachers in dayto-day instruction or qualitatively affect the education of students with disabilities. And yet, the mothers perceived the PPP process to be valuable.…”

“…teacher, physical education specialist, teacher associate, and resource teacher). Although the utility of the PPP process in inclusive education setting has been questioned (Dudley-Marling, 1985), the mothers recognized that the PPP was the major source of communication between home and school and actively engaged in the process.…”

“…Previous research suggests that teachers were not always satisfied with the overall PPP process (Dudley-Marling, 1985;Morgan & Rhode, 1983). For example, a study by Morgan & Rhode (1983), on the attitudes of special education teachers toward the requirement for an PPP and PPP process, revealed that it was too demanding of their time and they received insufficient support from other school personnel in its development.…”

“…The special education teachers did state, however, that the PPP process helped them organize their time and its development and implementation could result in greater job satisfaction. Dudley-Marling (1985) also found that the PPP did not usually assist teachers in planning day-to-day instruction and did not qualitatively affect the education of students with disabilities as it did not guide the delivery of services on a daily basis. Smith & Simpson (1989) evaluated the quality of the PPPs in terms of procedural compliance, substantive content, and the congruency of assessed needs and annual goals for students with emotional and behavioural disorders.…”

Examination and evaluation of individualized education programs prepared for intellectual disability students<p>Zihin yetersizliğine sahip olan öğrenciler için hazırlanan bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programlarının incelenmesi ve değerlendirilmesi

“…Yapılan araştırmalara göre, incelenen BEP' lerin, amaç ve hedeflerinin öğrenci ihtiyaç ve özelliklerini yansıtmadığı yönünde tekrar eden bulgular dikkat çekmektedir. Buna bağlı olarak ta BEP' in program bileşenleri arasındaki bağlantının zayıf olduğu ve eğitimciye rehber olmadığı görülmektedir (Morgan & Rhode, 1983;Dudley-Marling, 1985;Fiedler & Knight, 1986;Margolis & Truesdell, 1987;Reiher, 1992;Siegel, 2017). Ayrıca, BEP amaç ve hedeflerini yazarken önerilen ile uygulama arasındaki bir boşluk olduğu belirtilmektedir (Bricker ve diğerleri, 1998;Grisham-Brown & Hemmeter, 1998).…”