This study examined how Florida administrative law judges (ALJs) constructed an appropriate education for students with disabilities in their final orders. This study utilized the Johnstone Method as a heuristic in analyzing the data. It examined the construction of an appropriate education from the implementation of PL 94-142 up to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Board of Education v. Rowley (1975-1978), after the Rowley decision (1983-1986), and after the reauthorization of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act in 2004 (2004-2007). Each time period was examined individually and then the results were compared. The data sources included six purposively sampled final orders obtained from the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings and the Florida Department of Education. Two final orders per time period have been examined. For each time period, one final order with the school district as the prevailing party and one with the parent as the prevailing party were selected. Immersive line-by-line coding, and grounding of claims in specific textual evidence have been utilized to establish trustworthiness. The results indicate that during the period pre-Rowley, ALJs constructed an "appropriate" education based on the needs of the child and the special education program proposed to meet those needs. Deference was not given to one party over the other and the ALJ used his or her judgment in helping to construct an appropriate education. After the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Board of Education v. Rowley (1982), experts were charged with constructing an appropriate education for students with disabilities. This decision established an epistemic hierarchy that gave deference to school districts over parents. Outcomes were not considered by ALJs in constructing an appropriate education post-Rowley. The purpose of special education as outlined in IDEA (2004) had no impact on the construction of an appropriate education for a student with a disability; instead the Rowley decision impacted the time period post-IDEA (2004). Throughout the three time periods, the ALJs all emphasized that school districts are not required to provide the "best" education to students with disabilities.

Today's schools face a mounting number of court cases resulting from conflicts between parents of children with special needs and educators tasked with meeting those needs (Osborne, 2009). Principals have the enormous responsibility to ensure appropriate services to educate students with disabilities and, as special education leaders, require a skill set that includes knowledge of current laws, litigation, student learning needs, and how to support parents' decision making rights and responsibilities. A gap is evident between what principals know about special education leadership and case law and what principals are doing in the field. The purpose of this study was to identify effective actions and behaviors that support Virginia principals' leadership in special education decision making. More specifically, the study examined what can be done to minimize special education disputes between parents and schools and identify principals' skill sets to minimize special education disputes. Two concurrent Delphi studies were conducted with 16 member panels; stakeholders with familial responsibilities to children with disabilities and professional experts with responsibility to special education compliance participated. A final round exchanged findings between the panels. The study identified a list of best practices for Virginia school principals to support special education leadership and decision making. / Ed. D.

This study discussed past research, litigation, and legislation that pertained to the topics of parental involvement in special education. Past barriers were discussed that kept parents from interacting and suggestions were provided for future help in overcoming these barriers. In particular, parental perceptions of their roles as communicators and decision makers in the special education process were examined in terms of ethnicity and child’s educational level. Very few items found differences between the perceptions of Hispanic parents when compared to the perceptions of white parents; and some items found as children advance academically, there is less agreement among parents that they were able to be good communicators and good decision makers. Still, this research study showed that, overall, parents in Texas perceive that schools are allowing them to at least adequately fulfill these roles. Thus, the results of this study are much more positive than past research, which indicated that parents felt left out of their children’s education. This more positive perception could be a result of legislation passed to ensure parental roles in educational decision making; it could be a result of actions taken by the state of Texas to monitor the enactment of this legislation; or it could be because schools are taking a more active role in providing best practice services to students and parents in terms of communication and decision-making opportunities; or it could be because the parents who answered the survey were particularly compliant or complacent.

This study discussed past research, litigation, and legislation that pertained to the topics of parental involvement in special education. Past barriers were discussed that kept parents from interacting and suggestions were provided for future help in overcoming these barriers. In particular, parental perceptions of their roles as communicators and decision makers in the special education process were examined in terms of ethnicity and child’s educational level. Very few items found differences between the perceptions of Hispanic parents when compared to the perceptions of white parents; and some items found as children advance academically, there is less agreement among parents that they were able to be good communicators and good decision makers. Still, this research study showed that, overall, parents in Texas perceive that schools are allowing them to at least adequately fulfill these roles. Thus, the results of this study are much more positive than past research, which indicated that parents felt left out of their children’s education. This more positive perception could be a result of legislation passed to ensure parental roles in educational decision making; it could be a result of actions taken by the state of Texas to monitor the enactment of this legislation; or it could be because schools are taking a more active role in providing best practice services to students and parents in terms of communication and decision-making opportunities; or it could be because the parents who answered the survey were particularly compliant or complacent.

Students with disabilities are highly at-risk for administrative disciplinary actions that remove them from school for misconduct. School leaders have the authority and expertise to reduce the amount of these removals by reconsidering their current methods for discipline, reflecting on how these affect their students, and making changes to student consequences. The purpose of this study was to determine what highly skilled principals in the field have found to be the most effective strategies in reducing or eliminating out-of-school suspensions for students with disabilities. This insight is invaluable to the discussion on next steps to close the discipline gap between special education and regular education students. This study used a Delphi model for research building consensus through three rounds of surveys. This input was collected from a panel of 15 principals from 13 school divisions across Virginia that were identified as having already achieved success in eliminating out-of-school suspensions for students with disabilities. The panel concluded that principals must ensure a positive relationship with every student, use alternative, logical, and authentic consequences, and identify and implement individualized supports and accommodations when addressing student misconduct to eliminate out-of-school suspensions for their students with disabilities. Principals should implement practical strategies that proactively build positive relationships and help them better understand the child as an individual in order to reduce or eliminate suspensions in their schools. / Doctor of Education / Students with disabilities are highly at-risk for administrative disciplinary actions that remove them from school for misconduct. School leaders have the authority and expertise to reduce the amount of these removals by reconsidering their current methods for discipline, reflecting on how these affect their students, and making changes to student consequences. The purpose of this study was to determine what highly skilled principals in the field have found to be the most effective strategies in reducing or eliminating out-of-school suspensions for students with disabilities. This insight is invaluable to the discussion on next steps to close the discipline gap between special education and regular education students. This study used surveys to gather input and find agreement on best practices from a panel of elementary school principals from many school divisions across Virginia. The panel concluded that principals must ensure a positive relationship with every student, use alternative, logical, and authentic consequences, and identify and implement individualized supports and accommodations when addressing student misconduct to eliminate out-of-school suspensions for their students with disabilities. Principals should implement practical strategies that proactively build positive relationships and help them better understand the child as an individual in order to reduce or eliminate suspensions in their schools.

Since the inception of special education laws in the 1970’s, special education teachers have been given the responsibility of educating children with exceptional needs. Those needs range from children with mild to moderate disabilities to children with moderate to severe disabilities. There are 13 categories that a child can qualify for special education services through an Individual Education Program (IEP). The majority of children with exceptional needs are educated on general education campuses. With high stakes testing and the push for academic excellence, one may wonder how a child with exceptional needs fits into a general education campus. The Education of Handicapped Act (EHA) was passed in 1970 and guaranteed that every child was entitled to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) at any public-school facility. Since that time, more laws have been updated and renamed giving a child with a disability more access and rights to a FAPE. Special education can be very complex, and teachers must work with students who have a varying degree of disabilities. Special education teachers are responsible for creating lessons to address the academic and behavioral needs of each of their students on their caseloads. They must also collaborate with the general education teachers to make sure they are aware of the needs and goals of the students in their classes. They are responsible for writing the IEP for each student on their caseload. They must evaluate their students throughout the school year on their goals and update their progress. Another role that the special education teacher has is to train the instructional assistance to work with the students and their unique needs (Capper & Frattura, 2009; Prather-Jones, 2011). Research shows that the main reasons special education teachers gave for leaving was lack of administrative support, huge caseloads, the demands of the IEP (Individual Education Program) paperwork, followed by isolation, too much diversity of student needs and the lack of appreciation by co-workers and administrators for all their hard work (Billingsley & Cross, 1991, 2007; Crocket, 2007; Prather-Jones, 2011). This study looked at the role of the site administrator and why it is important to support their special education teachers. Seven site elementary principals were interviewed to see what their perception was in helping their special education teachers with the special needs’ students on their respective school campuses. After conducting two interviews with each participant for a total of 14 interviews these are the themes that emerged: communication, mental health issues, lack of support/or delay in receiving help, culture between special education and general education teachers, support for special education programs and teachers, curriculum, funding and on the job training. This study used the lens of transformational leadership to see how principals perceived their role in helping their special education teachers.