Since Congress added autism as
a disability category to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
in 1990, the number of students receiving special education services in this
category has increased over 900 percent nationally. It’s critically important
that educators understand the provisions for providing legally and
educationally appropriate programs and services for students identified with
ASD.
Research indicates
that education is the most effective treatment/intervention for children with
ASD. The most recent reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA 2004) <http://idea.ed.gov/explore/home >entitles
all students with disabilities to a free, appropriate public education (FAPE).
FAPE encompasses both procedural safeguards and the student’s individual
education program (IEP). The IEP is the cornerstone for the education of a
child with ASD. When a student is determined eligible for special education
services, an IEP planning team is formed to develop the IEP and subsequently
determine placement.
Although clinical
diagnoses, psychiatric reports, and treatment recommendations can be helpful in
determining eligibility and educational planning, the provisions of IDEA are
the controlling authority with regard to decisions for special education. While
clinical information is professionally helpful, it is neither legally required
nor sufficient for determining educational placement. Therefore, it’s
especially important for administrators, parents, advocates, teachers and
non-school professionals to keep in mind that when it comes to special
education, it is state and federal education codes and regulations (not
clinical criteria) that determine eligibility and IEP planning decisions. Legal
and special education experts recommend the following guidelines to help school
districts meet the requirements for providing legally and educationally
appropriate programs and services to students with ASD.
1. School districts should ensure
that the IEP process follows the procedural requirements of IDEA. This includes
actively involving parents in the IEP process and adhering to the time frame
requirements for assessment and developing and implementing the student’s IEP.
Moreover, parents must be notified of their due process rights. It’s
important to recognize that parent-professional communication and
collaboration are key components for making educational and program decisions.
2. School districts should
make certain that comprehensive, individualized evaluations are completed by
school professionals who have knowledge, experience, and expertise in ASD. If
qualified personnel are not available, school districts should provide the
appropriate training or retain the services of a consultant.
3. School districts should
develop IEPs based on the child’s unique pattern of strengths and weaknesses.
Goals for a child with ASD commonly include the areas of communication, social
behavior, adaptive skills, challenging behavior, and academic and functional
skills. The IEP must address appropriate instructional and curricular
modifications, together with related services such as counseling, occupational
therapy, speech/language therapy, physical therapy and transportation needs.
Evidence-based instructional strategies should also be adopted to ensure that
the IEP is implemented appropriately.
4. School districts should
assure that progress monitoring of students with ASD is completed at specified
intervals by an interdisciplinary team of professionals who have a knowledge
base and experience in autism. This includes collecting evidence-based data to
document progress towards achieving IEP goals and to assess program
effectiveness.
5. School districts should
make every effort to place students in integrated settings to maximize
interaction with non-disabled peers. Inclusion with typically developing
students is important for a child with ASD as peers provide the best models for
language and social skills. However, inclusive education alone is insufficient,
evidence-based intervention and training is also necessary to address specific
skill deficits. Although the least restrictive environment (LRE) provision of
IDEA requires that efforts be made to educate students with special needs in
less restrictive settings, IDEA also recognizes that some students may require
a more comprehensive program to provide FAPE.
6. School districts should
provide on-going training and education in ASD for both parents and
professionals. Professionals who are trained in specific methodology and
techniques will be most effective in providing the appropriate services and in
modifying curriculum based upon the unique needs of the individual child.
References and further
reading:
Mandlawitz, M. R. (2002).
The impact of the legal system on educational programming for young children
with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 32, 495-508.
National Research Council
(2001). Educating children with autism. Committee on Educational
Interventions for Children with Autism. C. Lord & J. P. McGee (Eds).
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Yell, M. L., Katsiyannis,
A, Drasgow, E, & Herbst, M. (2003). Developing legally correct and
educationally appropriate programs for students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus
on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18, 182-191.
©Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD