Mitchell L. Yell

Reflections on the 25th Anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

November 29, 2000, marked the 25th anniversary of the signing into law of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This seminal law has improved the educational opportunities for students with disabilities in the United States. In this article we briefly review the IDEAs first 25 years and speculate on the direction the IDEA may take in the future. Our purpose in this article is to (a) present the litigative and legislative developments that led to the passage of IDEA, (b) examine the law itself and the litigation interpreting the IDEA, and (c) discuss the direction that IDEA may take over the next 25 years.

Developing Legally Correct and Educationally Appropriate IEPs

The Individualized Education Program (IEP) has been the cornerstone of special education since the Education for All Handicapped Children Act became law in 1975. We begin this article by examining the relationship between the IEP and a free, appropriate public education. Then we discuss the IEP process and highlight the procedural changes and new requirements mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997. Next, we present information from a number of due process hearings and cases that have involved IEPs to illustrate mistakes school districts often make that can result in rulings against a district. Finally, we provide guidelines to assist schools with developing legally correct and educationally appropriate IEPs.

Developing Legally Correct and Educationally Appropriate Programs for Students With Autism Spectrum Disorders

Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in litigation regarding the education of students With autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Because of the complexity of ASD and the costs of litigation related to the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, ASD has become a high-stakes issue for parents and school districts. The purpose of this article is to extrapolate principles from the ASD litigation to provide guidelines to assist Individualized Education Program teams in developing appropriate special education programs for students With ASD.

Placing Students with Disabilities in Inclusive Settings: Legal Guidelines and Preferred Practices

Two federal laws have been extremely important in providing rules and regulations to guide the educational placement of students with disabilities. The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) created a detailed set of guidelines to ensure an appropriate education in the least restrictive setting for students who are eligible for special education programs. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 also addressed the placement of students with disabilities (Rehabilitation Act, 1973). These laws provide guidance in determining the appropriate placement of students; nevertheless, what constitutes an appropriate placement for an individual student has often proven to be a very difficult issue for school districts. The purpose of this article is to clarify some of the confusion and controversy surounding the placement of students with disabilities by examining its basis in the IDEA and Section 504, and subsequent legal interpretations by the U.S. Department of Education and in courts across the United States. Based on these considerations, the authors propose recommendations to assist school officials to meet the placement requirements of IDEA and Section 504 in a legally correct and educationally appropriate manner.

Barriers to Implementing Curriculum-Based Measurement.

The purpose of this investigation was to identify the most problematic barriers to effective implementation of Curriculum-based measures in special education programs as perceived by administrators and teachers. Two studies using the Delphi Probe procedure were conducted. The studies were conducted with 56 special education administrators and 146 special education teachers. Administrators and teachers included in the survey had experience in implementing curriculum-based measurement in their programs, schools, and school districts. Results of the administrator Delphi indicated that the greatest barriers included teacher data utilization, logistical concerns, and the difficulties inherent to introducing change into systems. Results of the teacher Delphi indicated that the greatest problems were logistical and concerns with the face validity of the measures. Implications of the findings are discussed.

Searching for Safe Schools: Legal Issues in the Prevention of School Violence

Violence in the United States has reached epidemic proportions, with a predictable spillover into public schools. The national concern over the problem of school violence has led to federal, state, and local efforts to address this issue by creating new laws and policies, which include adopting zero-tolerance approaches, conducting targeted and random searches of students and their property, using metal detectors, and preventing violence through education. In this article, we begin by examining these laws and policies.Then, we separate school district reactions to violence into three categories: tertiary, secondary, and primary prevention and describe procedures within each category. We end by proposing a framework within which school districts may develop legally correct policies and procedures to address school violence.

Individualized Education Programs: Legal Requirements and Research Findings

The individual education program (IEP) is of critical importance to educators, parents, and students. Through the IEP process school-based teams (a) assess the educational needs of a student, (b) develop meaningful and measurable goals that direct the students program, (c) develop and implement a program of special education and related services, and (d) monitor the students progress toward his or her goals. Our purpose in this article is to review the legal requirements in developing, implementing, and evaluating the IEP; examine the research that has been conducted on IEPs; and discuss the implications of the law and research for school-based teams in developing IEPs.

Preventing Youth Incarceration Through Reading Remediation: Issues and Solutions

The majority of court-involved youths have experienced academic failure, school exclusion, and dropout. Researchers have identified factors that increase a youths risk for court involvement and incarceration. The risk factors include individual, family, community, peer, and school factors. Researchers actually have identified specific school-based policies and practices that may exacerbate the risks for delinquent behavior and incarceration among youths. For example, many incarcerated youths have failed to learn to read. The fact that youths who have deficits in reading are disproportionately represented in correctional institutions suggests that the juvenile justice system has become the default system for many youths who have reading problems. This article describes factors that put youths at risk for incarceration, discusses factors that protect youths from delinquency and incarceration, examines the specific protective factor of reading remediation, and offers recommendations to school-based personnel to ensure that schools adopt effective remedial reading programs for at-risk youths.

Developing Legally Correct and Educationally Meaningful IEPs Using Curriculum-Based Measurement

The individualized education program (IEP) has been the cornerstone of special education since the Education for All Handicapped Childrens Act became law in 1975. Nevertheless, IEPs have been fraught with legal and educational problems. In this article we examine the process for developing IEPs and suggest that, by using curriculum-based measurement, school districts can ensure that they develop and implement IEPs that both meet the requirements of the law and provide meaningful educational programs for students with disabilities who have basic skills deficits. We begin by examining problems in IEP development, focusing on violations of the IEP process. Then, we discuss the three major components of the IEP. Finally, we present a case study of the use of curriculum-based measurement to develop legally correct and educationally meaningful IEPs.

The Legal Basis of Response to Intervention: Analysis and Implications

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004 makes significant and controversial changes to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Two very significant changes in this law are provisions that (a) allow school districts to spend up to 15% of their IDEA Part B funds on early intervening services in general education settings and (b) prohibit states from requiring that school districts use discrepancy formulas to determine if students are eligible for special education services in the category of learning disabilities. Additionally, Congress recommended that school districts use a response to intervention procedure in both early intervening services and for the identification of students with learning disabilities. In this article we first describe two significant reports that recommended that Congress abandon the current eligibility system in special education for students with high-incidence disabilities. Second we explain how Congress and the U.S. Department of Education changed the special education eligibility system for learning disabilities in the IDEIA and the regulations that implemented the IDEIA. Third we review due process hearings and court cases that have addressed response to intervention. Fourth we offer recommendations to teachers, administrators, and teacher trainers to ensure that they meet the letter and spirit of these new requirements of the IDEIA.