No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (M.A. (Clinical Psychology)) -- University of Limpopo, 2017 / Caring for children with intellectual disability often results in stressful experiences for caregivers, even leading to crises in some cases. The aim of the present study was to explore the lived experiences of teachers of intellectually disabled learners in three special schools in Capricorn District, Limpopo Province. The study sought to determine teachers’ understanding of intellectual disability, the challenges they face in working with such children, and the psychological strategies they use to deal with intellectually disabled learners. The study was qualitative in nature. The sample consisted of 9 participants (male=0; females=9) working with intellectually disabled learners in special schools who were selected through a non-probability purposive sampling technique. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews and analysed using the interpretive phenomenological analysis. An understanding of intellectual disability as denoting deficits in such learners’ brains, preventing their optimum functioning was common. The findings of the study show that the experience of teachers of children with intellectual disability was fairly positive. It was characterised by feelings of fulfilment and contentment. Nonetheless, challenges such as burn out, stigma and lack of parental and government support were also revealed in the study. Essentially, the study recommends workshops on effective coping strategies for the teachers, and public awareness campaigns in communities about intellectual disability, amongst others.

This study examined the comments submitted by the public to the United States Department of Education (USDE), the Office of Special Education Programs, in response to the 2004 amended IDEA, prior to the development and publication of proposed regulations under 34 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 300 and 303 to implement programs under IDEA. Specifically, this study analyzed the types of individuals (e.g., parents, advocates, administrators, lawyers, support staff personnel) and interest groups along with the number of submissions, types of comments made, and specific provisions in the legislation that received the most comments during the period open to the public prior to the publication of the proposed regulations. In addition, an exploration of the existence of differences in comments submitted by states and regions was analyzed in terms of types of individuals, interest groups, types of comments, and specific provision of the 2004 amended IDEA. Content analysis approach utilizing qualitative data collection and analysis procedures was used for this study. The sample consisted of 2,199 comments submitted to the USDE via the U.S. Postal system, e-mail, and verbal testimony transcripts obtained during one of the public meetings held throughout the United States during the 60 day period open for commenting. The findings of this study revealed a large number of a particular type of respondent types, the majority of the comments were neutral in nature, and the largest percentage of comments received were directed at one particular section of the Act.

The purpose of this study was to review historical legislation relevant to the education of individuals with disabilities, examine the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Act and related case law, and to create a knowledge base from which school-based professionals can make legally sound policy and planning decisions and reduce liability for noncompliance with the applicable laws and regulations pertaining to the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In addition, the study provided insight into the law and increased the comfort levels of school-based personnel who deal with exceptional students, thereby increasing the likelihood of success of exceptional students being served by these professionals in traditional settings. The study sought to: (a) determine the duties and responsibi~ities of school-based administrators arising from 1997 Amendments to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; (b) establish how recent federal legislation and regulations have changed the duties and responsibilities of school districts regarding students identified under the 1997 Amendments to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; identify the potential liabilities and remedies fer educational insti~utions for violation of 1997 Amendments to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; and presented recommendations for changes in policies which will contribute to an educational institution's ability to successfully meet ~he needs of disabled students as required under the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

With the passage of P.L.94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, a national statement was made regarding the rights of handicapped students to a free, appropriate education. Since passage of the law, the cost of implementing P.L.94-142 has been a topic of concern for policymakers, school administrators and taxpayers. The rising cost of special and general education has placed a greater emphasis on accountability for the quality of the programs to justify the expenditures. Thus, the need for cost analysis in education is becoming more important as the competition with other governmental agencies for available funds becomes more acute. Previous studies of special education finance related to cost accounting have indicated the difficulties in gathering accurate data on a uniform basis. As evidenced in this study, not all expenditures were properly charged to special education. When this occurs, benefits of cost analysis are diminished by the inaccuracy. An effective cost analysis system should be accurate, comprehensive and precise, and should not be cumbersome. The Larson Model (1985) can be used to calculate the cost of individual programs and services, and the aggregate costs by handicapping condition or environment. The purpose of this study was to test an instrument that would provide a descriptive cost analysis of the special education programs and services in Frederick County, Maryland, Public Schools during the 1984-85 school year. Per pupil costs were determined by environment or level of service as defined by the Maryland State Bylaw Continuum of Services for special education. This study provides additional testing and development of a common framework or model for descriptive cost analysis of public special education programs and services by local educational agencies. / Ed. D.

No description available.

The procedural safeguard requirements of P.L. 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Act of 1975 are designed to ensure the rights of parents and children in matters related to provisions of special edt!cation and related services. Provisions within the law provide for dispute resolution between parents and LEA through an impartial due process hearing. State education agencies are responsible to ensure these and other requirements in the law are fulfilled to receive federal monies under the Act. The literature suggests the due process hearing requirements have resulted in issues and outcomes that were unintended by the original design of these procedures to protect fundamental rights, and to ensure a fair and timely hearing. Information was obtained from the key participants in the process: LEAs, parents, and hearing officers. Through the administration of a survey instrument to 225 LEAs, parents, and hearing officers in Virginia, the following research questions were addressed: a) are the Virginia special education due process hearing requirements being implemented? b) to what extent are they being implemented? and c) what attitudes exist regarding these requirements from the respondents? The results of the study indicate that Virginia's hearing requirements are not being fully implemented and areas of needed improvement were cited in: a) timeline compliance, b) impartiality in due process hearings, c) LEA and hearing officer responsibilities, and d) consistency in the implementation of procedural safeguards. Negative attitudes towards the hearing procedures were influenced by the hearing officer's selection process, attitude and personal conduct of hearings, and knowledge of his duties and responsibilities. Informal methods of resolving disputes were considered desirable as compared to the formal adversarial hearing. This study has provided recommendations to the Virginia SEA for needed improvement in the implementation of the due process hearing requirements and suggestions for further research. / Ed. D.