Empowering Speech-Language Pathologists: Strategies for Effective Individualized Education Program Navigation and Inclusive Practice in Schools

You have accessLanguage, Speech, and Hearing Services in SchoolsIntroduction4 Apr 2024Empowering Speech-Language Pathologists: Strategies for Effective Individualized Education Program Navigation and Inclusive Practice in Schools Marie C. Ireland, and Shannon Hall-Mills Marie C. Ireland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5087-350X School of Arts and Education, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia Google Scholar and Shannon Hall-Mills https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1928-3827 School of Communication Science and Disorders, Florida State University, Tallahassee Google Scholar https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_LSHSS-24-00026 SectionsAboutAbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationTrack Citations ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In This forum for Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, focusing on the Individualized Education Program (IEP), presents a unique opportunity to provide a series of curated research articles, viewpoints, clinical focus articles, and tutorials about translational research that can be used immediately by school speech-language pathologists (SLPs), school administrators, and university faculty providing preservice training. Some articles provide a proof of concept, while others explore feasibility of approaches or provide a model to follow with explicit information on implementation within the context of the current education landscape and awareness of the requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA; U.S. Department of Education, 2016). IDEA and IEPs The IDEA requires each child with an identified disability have an IEP that includes specific information. The IEP should serve as a roadmap for educators and families, including the student, and provide information to assist the IEP team and educators in meeting the student's individual needs. An IEP is required for every student with a disability under the IDEA, which makes available a free appropriate public education (FAPE) and ensures special education and related services are available to eligible children with disabilities. IEPs are the foundation of special education services and should serve as the guiding document for teams including SLPs. Federal regulations require that the IEP be developed with input from general and special educators, SLPs, other related service providers as needed, plus the student and their family members. The document should provide a robust description of the student's strengths and weaknesses as well as goals, supports, transition plans, and statements about how student progress will be monitored. The practices reflected in the goals and services outlined in IEPs should be evidence-based. In addition to federal regulations, each state education agency (SEA) promulgates regulations addressing special education and may publish guidance to assist in the implementation of the regulations. Local education agencies (LEAs) are required to implement both federal and state regulations and may adopt additional policies or procedures at the local level. Procedural compliance means adhering to the federal, state, and local rules for IEP development, such as meeting timelines, IEP team composition, and ensuring all parts of the IEP are included. Substantive compliance means developing an IEP that focuses on the student's unique needs. IEPs should target high expectations and meaningful progress to ensure educational benefit (Yell et al., 2020). There should be alignment between parts of the IEP (Hott et al., 2021) to create "meaningful educational experiences" (Blackwell & Rossetti, 2014, p. 12). IEPs should be high quality, objective, and ambitious (Turnbull et al., 2018) and include quality indicators. Without genuine individualization, the focus on compliance alone may result in poorly written IEPs that undermine student outcomes. SLPs in Public School Settings Over 50% of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's 223,000 members work in the public school setting (ASHA, 2022) providing services to students as mandated by the student's IEP. In 2022, over 7.2 million students in public schools in the United States received special education services. Speech-language impairment is the second largest primary disability category (National Center for Education Statistics, 2023). SLPs must be aware of state and local requirements to ensure consistent development of IEPs and be aware of changes in public policy and current evidence-based practices to ensure the development of an IEP that is both procedurally and substantively compliant. The Changing Education Landscape and IEPs Since the initial legislation that mandated educational services for children with disabilities, approaches to educating children with disabilities have changed significantly. Inclusion and meaningful experiences have replaced segregated and more restrictive educational environments. Additionally, the climate of accountability in public education has heightened due to additional focus on adequate yearly progress (Twachtman-Cullen & Twachtman-Bassett, 2011) in No Child Left Behind (NCLB; United States Congress, 2015). The 2004 changes to IDEA increased focus on inclusive settings and narrowing the achievement gap and introduced federal monitoring of special education outcomes (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). Annual reporting of disproportionality, inclusive practices in the least restrictive environment (LRE), and outcomes including graduation rates and other measures of student success are now required. Subsequent reauthorization introduced multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) targeting instructional effectiveness. This, combined with efforts to address misidentification, requires increased collaboration between general and special education staff. Advances in technology have shifted the development of IEP from paper forms to computerized applications that may contain goal banks, robust information menus, and audit rules to improve compliance with state and federal regulations. While most IEPs are written using computerized systems to increase procedural compliance, the use of technology does not guarantee a quality IEP. The quality and appropriateness of content (substantive compliance) is more difficult to analyze than procedural compliance such as signature checks or automated date calculations. Professional collaboration is needed across work settings (e.g., LEA, SEA, and researchers) to examine processes and implement evidence-based practice within the context of special education. Enduring Issues and IEPs The IDEA requires services that provide a FAPE, which is very different from a family's desire to have the best services for their child. This juxtaposition of appropriate versus best results in frequent disagreements and tensions between families and IEP teams. Unfortunately, the litigious nature of special education and high cost of resolving disputes has heightened the emphasis on compliance, drawing focus away from the IEP as a tool for educational planning. IEP teams must refocus on curriculum-relevant collaborative services and monitoring of student progress that results in meaningful educational benefit. SLPs must be prepared to deal with this enduring conflict and share with the team specific regulatory requirements and individualized student data to support their recommendations. Focus of This Forum This forum actively supports the IEP process by providing articles on various topics, from gathering data to monitoring progress. It also emphasizes engaging with students and families. The articles highlight specific information regarding how to engage with conflict and work with others to address concerns in the implementation of children's IEPs. Authors describe models and case studies to inform thinking on IEP practices and use of data for program improvement and showcase current research related to IEP development and implementation. While spanning a variety of topics related to the IEP, this forum addresses four major areas: (a) considerations for before the IEP is developed, (b) approaches and considerations for use during the IEP team meeting, (c) strategies for the development of the IEP document to increase educational relevance and outcomes, and (d) use of an IEP as a data source for program improvement. Highlights from each article that align with the major focus areas are provided in Table 1. Individuals and education agencies may apply information from these articles to develop solutions for their own context. The samples and resources included in these articles may assist professionals in developing and implementing new approaches but may need to be adjusted to comply with state regulatory and procedural differences. Table 1. Focus areas and highlights of articles in this forum on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). Focus area Article title Highlights Before the IEP Meeting A Balancing Act: How School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists Navigate Their Efforts Related to Individual Education Plans and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (Sylvan et al., 2024) A research article examining SLPs' involvement in the MTSS framework and direct support to students with disabilities through IEPs Addresses the multifaceted roles of SLPs in public schools, including as pivotal members of collaborative teams Highlights SLP responsibilities in assessment, intervention, program design, compliance, and prevention Special Education Assessment: Practices That Support Eligibility and Intervention (Power-deFur, 2024) A tutorial providing an overview of requirements for assessment, eligibility determination, and IEP development Explains the vital role of SLPs in conducting assessments to gauge students' skills in academic and functional domains Discusses challenges that arise from conflicts between best assessment practices and the preference for standardized assessments by special education teams IEP Meeting Approaches Using a Social Model to Guide Individualized Education Program Development and Change Educational Paradigms to Be Critically Inclusive (Murza & Buckley, 2024) A tutorial reviewing of opportunities to shift thinking and approach IEP development using inclusive student-centered approaches Provides a social model of disability framework to guide IEP development Student-Led Individualized Education Programs: A Gateway to Self-Determination (McNaught et al., 2024) Clinical focus article on methods of development in transition IEP planning based on postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities Provides qualitative data from the "I'm Determined" program in Virginia highlighting students' experiences about student-led IEPs Underscores the importance of an individualized approach to transition IEP planning with a focus on the student's postschool goals Conflict Engagement for Individualized Education Program Team Members (Abell, 2024) Viewpoint about effective and intentional conflict engagement practices IEP teams can engage with to build trust and increase opportunities for innovation to address complex challenges in the implementation of IEPs IEP Development Maximizing Student Outcomes in Schools: Data-Driven Individualized Education Program Goals and Objectives Aligned to the Standards (Powell et al., 2024) Clinical focus article to guide SLPs in using their state and local curriculum to link IEP goals to academic impact Discusses considerations for what the student must do to be successful in the curriculum Exploring Speech-Language Pathologists' Perception of and Individualized Education Program Goals for Vocabulary Intervention With School-Age Children With Language Disorders (Marante & Hall-Mills, 2024) Research article examining SLPs' beliefs and expectations regarding vocabulary instruction and the content of IEP goals Divergent views and practices persisted in the vocabulary intervention SLPs provide for students with IEPs Qualitative analysis of IEP goals for vocabulary revealed the range and frequency of strategies and intervention targets as an artifact of implementation of robust vocabulary instruction How Inclusive Practice Increases the Educational Relevance of Individualized Education Programs (Heilmann et al., 2024) Clinical focus article on the importance of prioritizing general education content and contexts, involving collaboration between special and general educators Discusses shifting to an inclusive framework to ensure meaningful experiences and engaging with an inclusive mindset, focusing on academic and social performance within the general education environment for development of educationally relevant IEPs Using IEP Data to Improve Practice Workload Versus Caseload: An Exploratory Comparison Study of Individualized Education Program Progress and Other Outcomes (Carlin, 2024) Clinical focus article highlighting the limitations of the caseload approach for SLPs Advocates for the more effective workload approach that allows dedicated time for direct and indirect services, ensuring compliance and avoiding procedural violations Go Beyond Compliance: Use Individualized Education Programs to Answer Strategic Questions and Improve Programs (Woods et al., 2024) Clinical focus article highlighting opportunities for SEA, LEA, school administrators, and SLPs to use IEP data for program improvement Provides sample data analysis questions and results from state-level data analysis Note. MTSS = multi-tiered systems of support; SLP = speech-language pathologist; SEA = state education agency; LEA = local education agency. Before the IEP Meeting Prior to focusing attention on the development of the IEP, professionals must consider the processes and systems used to instruct, refer, evaluate, and identify students with disabilities (Ireland et al., 2020). SLPs evaluate students with suspected disabilities and provide services to those who are found eligible if the IEP team determines that services are required. SLPs may target academic and/or functional domains. Tensions between SLPs and school teams related to evaluation and decision making (Ireland et al., 2024) may involve assessment practices or application of eligibility criteria. Focusing on student needs outside of special education, MTSS provide an opportunity to reshape the role of the school SLP. Use of MTSS to support students may address longstanding concerns with overidentification, high caseloads, and paperwork issues. Alongside educators, SLPs may assist students prior to referral, reducing the opportunities for misidentification and possibly preventing the need for special education and related services. IEP Meeting Approaches There have been significant changes in views on disabilities and education since the inception of the IDEA. Focusing on student strengths and abilities and inclusive opportunities to interact with meaningful participation have replaced outdated approaches, such as segregated education settings. The IDEA specifically names the student as a member of the IEP team whose input is valuable in drafting an appropriate educational plan. Students as young as kindergarten age can effectively participate in their own IEPs and help parents and educators understand the impact of a disability on the student. Programs such as "I'm Determined" (Virginia Training and Technical Assistance Center, n.d.) provide information and tools to support student involvement in IEP meetings. Professionals may recognize that the mismatch between the IDEA's requirement for FAPE and a family's desire for the best services often results in disagreements between IEP team members and contentious IEP meetings. SLPs and educators must be prepared to deal with conflict and work proactively with families and students to address concerns that arise. A clear understanding of the IDEA regulations strengthens this vital skill, ensuring smooth navigation from referral to IEP decisions (goals, service amount/type). Articles in the "Before the IEP Meeting," "IEP Meeting Approaches," and "IEP Development" sections provide additional information and context to address questions and concerns that may surface as disagreement among team members. IEP Development Developing educationally relevant goals and efficient, effective services ensures IEPs are both substantively and procedurally compliant. IEP teams should target student participation in appropriate activities and focus on inclusive practices aimed at meaningful participation. Development of efficient and effective goals and service approaches should be informed by current research evidence. Additionally, use of data-driven goals and objectives aligned to curricular standards expand the educational relevance of SLP services. SLPs working collaboratively with special education teams are pivotal members of the team developing IEPs that allow students with disabilities to thrive functionally and academically. Using IEP Data to Improve Practice The use of computerized systems affords an unprecedented opportunity to analyze data from IEPs to inform educational practice and target improved outcomes. At the state and local levels, these data may inform management of caseloads, staffing decisions, compliance efforts, and the identification of professional development topics for staff and families. It may also provide real-time data about student outcomes and the effectiveness of educational programming for both individual students and aggregated groups. The development of efficient approaches that harness the IEP as a data source is impacted by state and local differences in special education practices and state documentation requirements (Morgan et al., 2016). Professionals need to make efforts to utilize aggregated IEP data as a tool for improving educational programs. Rethinking Your Relationship With IEPs In light of changes to educational policy, technology, and practices in U.S. public schools, rethinking your understanding and relationship to IEPs is a much-needed step for professionals practicing in myriad work settings. Practicing SLPs and school administrators must consider the impact of policy changes within general education such as MTSS and the increased federal focus on overidentification and disproportionate representation in special education (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). University instructors must stay current with practice patterns and changes in public education to ensure preservice coursework and school-based practicum experiences adequately prepare students for the ever-changing landscape in public education. Program administrators in higher education must consider a range of educational and training experiences for communication sciences and disorders students to be prepared for work in the schools, including the development and implementation of IEPs (Marante & Hall-Mills, 2019). To reduce the research-to-practice gap, researchers may utilize the current context of special education to inform study design and increase efforts to partner with SEAs and LEAs to analyze the wealth of data in state and local IEP and other data systems. Policymakers at the state and federal level may consider leveraging robust data provided by IEP software to reveal opportunities and issues that impact student outcomes. Parents have a unique opportunity, as members of the IEP team, to help shift the focus from procedural to meaningful substantive compliance. Conclusion This forum provides much-needed information to address the paucity of current literature promoting specific practices related to the development and implementation of the IEP. Articles address special education and provide context for services provided under the IDEA in U.S. public schools with a particular focus on the SLP's role in development and use of the IEP. Descriptions of model programs and innovative practices support expanding the educational relevance of SLP services. These articles advance SLPs' knowledge and provide much-needed information to support advocacy and changes to practice. New research included in this forum illuminates future directions for research focused on IEPs and school SLP practice. Ultimately, the responsibility to deepen the understanding and use of IEP data and foster collaborative relationships to leverage these data sources to improve outcomes for all students rests with all of us, regardless of our work setting. Asterisks (*) indicate articles in the forum References * Abell, G. (2024). Conflict engagement for Individualized Education Program team members.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00093 Google Scholar American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2022). 2021 member and affiliate profile. https://www.asha.org/siteassets/surveys/2021-member-affiliate-profile.pdf [PDF] Google Scholar Blackwell, W. H., & Rossetti, Z. S. (2014). The development of Individualized Education Programs: Where have we been and where should we go now.SAGE Open, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014530411 CrossrefGoogle Scholar * Carlin, C. H. (2024). Workload versus caseload: An exploratory comparison study of Individualized Education Program progress and other outcomes.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00075 Google Scholar * Heilmann, J. J., Bertone, A., & Wojtyna, A. (2024). How inclusive practice increases the educational relevance of Individualized Education Programs.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00088 Google Scholar Hott, B. L., Jones, B. A., Rodriguez, J., Brigham, F. J., Martin, A., & Mirafuentes, M. (2021). Are rural students receiving FAPE? A descriptive review of IEPs for students with social, emotional, or behavioral needs.Behavior Modification, 45(1), 13–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445518825107 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Ireland, M. C., McLeod, S. L., Karquharson, K., & Crowe, K. (2020). Evaluating children in U.S. public schools with speech sounds disorders: Considering federal and state laws, guidance, and research.Topics in Language Disorders, 40(4), 326–340. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000226 CrossrefGoogle Scholar Ireland, M. C., McLeod, S. L., & Verdon, S. (2024). Eligibility determinations for speech and language services in U.S. public schools: Experiences and tensions.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(1), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_lshss-23-00039 ASHAWireGoogle Scholar * Marante, L., & Hall-Mills, S. (2024). Exploring speech-language pathologists' perception of and Individualized Education Program goals for vocabulary intervention with school-age children with language disorders.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00078 Google Scholar Marante, L., & Hall-Mills, S. (2019). Today's graduate students, tomorrow's SLPs: Enhancing school practicum experiences.Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 4(5), 1128–1135. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_PERS-SIG16-2019-0003 ASHAWireGoogle Scholar * McNaught, J., Biegun, D., & Swartzentruber, K. (2024). Student-led Individualized Education Programs: A gateway to self-determination.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00079 Google Scholar Morgan, P. L., Hammer, C. S., Farkas, G., Hillemeier, M. M., Maczuga, S., Cook, M., & Morano, S. (2016). Who receives speech/language services by 5 years of age in the United States.American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 25(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_AJSLP-14-0201 ASHAWireGoogle Scholar * Murza, K. A., & Buckley, P. C. (2024). Using a social model to guide Individualized Education Program development and change educational paradigms to be critically inclusive.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00081 Google Scholar National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). Students with disabilities: Condition of education. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgg Google Scholar * Powell, R., Schultz, J., Harvey, R., & Meaux, A. (2024). Maximizing student outcomes in schools: Data-driven Individualized Education Program goals and objectives aligned to the standards.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00082 Google Scholar * Power-deFur, L. A. (2024). Special education assessment: Practices that support eligibility and intervention.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00077 Google Scholar * Sylvan, L., Kingsley, H., Bartolett, G., & Gouck, M. A. (2024). Balancing act: How school-based speech-language pathologists navigate their efforts related to Individual Education Plans and multi-tiered systems of support.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_LSHSS-23-00073 Google Scholar Turnbull, H. R., Turnbull, A. P., & Cooper, D. H. (2018). The Supreme Court, Endrew, and the appropriate education of students with disabilities.Exceptional Children, 84(2), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917734150 CrossrefGoogle Scholar Twachtman-Cullen, D., & Twachtman-Bassett, J. (2011). The IEP from A to Z: How to create meaningful and measurable objectives (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: State performance plans/annual performance reports. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/spp-apr/ Google Scholar U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: 34 CFR §300.646. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/regs/b/f/300.646 Google Scholar United States Congress. (2015). Every Student Succeeds Act Public Law 114–95. https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf [PDF] Google Scholar Virginia Training and Technical Assistance Center. (n.d.). I'm Determined. https://www.imdetermined.org/ Google Scholar * Woods, A. D., Ireland, M. C., Murphy, K. A., & Lancaster, H. S. (2024). Go beyond compliance: Use Individualized Education Programs to answer strategic questions and improve programs.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), xxx–xxx. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_lshss-23-00084 Google Scholar Yell, M. L., Collins, J., Kumpiene, G., & Bateman, D. (2020). The Individualized Education Program: Procedural and substantive requirements.Teaching Exceptional Children, 52(5), 304–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920906592 CrossrefGoogle Scholar Author Notes Disclosure: The authors have declared that no competing financial or nonfinancial interests existed at the time of publication. Correspondence to Marie C. Ireland: [email protected] Editor-in-Chief: Kelly Farquharson Publisher Note: This article is part of the Forum: Developing and Implementing IEPs for Children With Disabilities in Schools: Current Processes, Models, and Research. Additional Resources FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Newly PublishedePub Ahead of IssuePages: 1-6 HistoryReceived: Mar 7, 2024Revised: Mar 11, 2024Accepted: Mar 11, 2024 Published online: Apr 4, 2024PubMed ID: 38573123 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library Metrics Topicsasha-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2024 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPDF downloadLoading ...