Certified orientation and mobility specialists, teachers of the visually impaired, board-certified behavior analysts, and music therapists may service eligible students.
Together both educators work as a team to deliver instruction while implementing the legal modifications and accommodations of the special needs students in the class.
The trend during the 1990s was to move away from this model, as previous research pointed to academic and behavioral growth among these students when taught via individualized instruction within the general setting.
The act stated that its purpose was fourfold: In 1986 EHA was reauthorized as PL 99-457, additionally covering infants and toddlers below age 3 with disabilities, and providing for associated Individual Family Service Plans (IFSP), prepared documents to ensure individualized special service delivery to families of respective infants and toddlers.
Prior to that time, the statutory focus in EHA was to provide access to education for disabled students who had been marginalized in the public school system.
Satisfied that the goal of "access" had been reached, in 1997 Congress enacted IDEA with the express purpose of addressing implementation problems resulting from "low expectations, and an insufficient focus on applying replicable research on proven methods of teaching and learning for children with disabilities."
The statute clearly stated its commitment to "our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities."
In 1997 IDEA was reauthorized as PL 105-17 and extended coverage to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), functional behavioral assessments and intervention plans were added, and the ITP's were integrated within IEP's.
Erin Dillon a former Senior Policy Analyst, states as a writer for "EducationSector" That all special education students do not fit the criteria of severely disabled.
[full citation needed] According to a CSEF 2004[14] report special education enrollments and expenditures have been growing steadily since the implementation of the IDEA in 1975.
Part B of IDEA originally authorized Congress to contribute up to 40 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure for each special education student.
However, the range of special education-eligible students in various districts is so broad, that the flat grant-based system creates significant disparities in the local effort required.
Resource-based formulas include unit and personnel mechanisms in which funds are based on payment for specified resources, such as teachers, aides, or equipment.
Under a percentage reimbursement system, the amount of state special education aid a district receives is directly based on its expenditures for the program.
Many states use separate funding mechanisms to target resources to specific populations or areas of policy concern, such as extended school year services or specialized equipment.
According to the CSEF report, a growing number of states have a separate funding stream that can be accessed by districts serving exceptionally "high-cost" special education students.
This purpose would be undercut if additional federal dollars were "supplanted" by merely reducing the level of state or local funding for special education.
20 USC 1413 Regulations implementing this requirement begin with a test that seeks to assure that funds provided to a local education agency (LEA) under Part B of IDEA may not be used to reduce the level of expenditures for the education of children with disabilities made by the LEA from local funds below the level of those expenditures for the preceding fiscal year.
Upon receipt of the referral, the school district will contact the parent to set up a meeting time in order to explain the process and obtain written consent to perform the necessary evaluations.
[7] Once all the evaluative material is presented and reviewed at the meeting, the IEP team must first determine whether the child is eligible for special education services.
Mediation may be a viable means to review small disagreements with the IEP, such as the number of sessions for a related service or the size of a special education class.
Impartial hearing which is a due process-based formal proceeding that allows the parents to challenge the district's education plan in whole or in part.
This means that students fall below the level of academic success that their peers are achieving, causing them to likely lash out or behave in a disturbing way as a result.
One important feature of SEELS was that it did not look at students' educational, social, vocational, and personal development at a single point in time.
[32] The studies found that grossly disproportionate numbers of minority students are identified as eligible for services, and too often placed in isolated and restrictive educational settings.
"[33] New statistics compiled on each state show both over and under-representation of minorities in the categories for "mental retardation," "specific learning disabilities," and "emotional disturbance."
[35] The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University looked to "identify and solve the problem" of minority children being misplaced in special education.
[40] Based on 1980 Census and Immigration and Naturalization Services records, it is estimated that there are 79 million school-age language minority children in the United States.
Considering the overall population with limited English proficiency (LEP) in the United States, a critical question for bilingual special educators is how many of these students also have disabilities.
Transition services are designed to focus on improving academic and functional achievement of the child, is based on the individual's needs, and provides instruction and experiences vital for employment and independent living.