The purpose of this study was to develop and refine an instrument to assess knowledge levels of the discipline provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 (IDEA '97). Such an instrument will assist in determining whether or not and to what extent additional training opportunities may be needed for school personnel who are responsible for disciplining students served in special education under IDEA '97. School officials who do not have proper knowledge and understanding of these provisions may violate students' rights by denying them the free appropriate public education to which they are entitled. The initial researcher designed instrument was a fixed-response test, consisting of 102 questions. Questions were based upon five identified areas of knowledge found in the discipline provisions: manifestation determination; functional behavior assessments; behavior intervention plans; interim alternative educational settings; and general procedural safeguards. Instrument items were written to assess knowledge for basic recall, commprehension, and application. A panel of experts reviewed this instrument to ensure content validity. Based upon the panel's recommendations, the instrument was revised and several questions were removed. A pilot study was then conducted with the resulting 68-question instrument. Fifty-eight graduate school students at East Tennessee State University participated in a test-retest study of the instrument. Pearson Product Moment Correlations and paired samples t-tests were used to determine test-retest reliability on the total test, as well as each subscale. Additionally, KR-20 estimates of internal consistency were obtained to determine the power of the instrument. The corrected item total correlations were utilized for each subscale to eliminate items that did not contribute to the consistency of the instrument. Finally, an item analysis was used to determine the final make up of the instrument. The final instrument contained 35 items, with seven items for each subscale.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires local education agencies to include parents as equal team members in the cultivation of their child’s individual education plan (IEP). Despite law, studies have shown that parents experience barriers to being included in the process. Barriers such as a lack of information, lack of understanding of the law, and feelings of unequal status or power as compared to school district team members have been noted. The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions, feelings, and understanding of the initial IEP process as experienced by parents new to the world of special education. This study took the form of two research articles, each with a set of three research questions. Through the utilization of narrative inquiry, I was able to listen to the stories of parents as they tried to navigate their way through the initial IEP experiences, hear who supported their understanding along the way, learn how parents perceived their role during their journey, feel the emotions that parents shared feeling during their experiences, and find out if parents knew their procedural safeguard rights. The most impactful barriers for parents new to special education was the lack of adherence to legal timelines. Parent requests for special education assessment took up to two years for some parents. Lack of information and understanding of the IEP process and law was another major hurdle for participants. Without adequate information and understanding parents felt a power imbalance and feeling of being taken advantage of. Parents described a disconnect regarding how they viewed their parent role and how the school district viewed their role. A copious amount of praise was given to family resource centers for their support and trainings offered to parents.

In the 27 years since the establishment of federal law mandating special education, no state has been fully in compliance. In addition, the voices of school personnel (special education teachers, speech and language pathologists, and school psychologists) charged with implementing these laws and regulations have been largely silent in the national research. A review of 1306 references concerning the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) did not find studies that included these front line school district personnel who serve as "intermediaries" and have responsibility to implement special education policy. This is the first study that provided a forum for Oregon professionals to share their concerns and suggestions regarding implementation of the IDEA. The study went beyond the enumeration of noncompliance areas, asked questions about why compliance is problematic, and compared what study participants view as problematic to litigated areas at the Oregon complaint investigation and due process hearing levels. Multiple methods in the data collection process included surveys (n=169), semi-structured interviews (n=11), and document analysis (n=147). To provide baseline information, quantitative analysis provided ordinal ranking of responses and statistical comparisons among participants from the different specialty areas, different years of experience, and different district sizes. It also compared participant responses to Oregon litigation. Part of the study used an exploratory and descriptive approach to obtain accurate and thick description of participant experiences. Participants' rankings differed significantly from identified areas in the literature and alleged violations brought in due process hearings and complaint investigations. Participants ranked least restrictive environment and evaluation concerns highest while the literature and reviewed litigation identified the individualized education program as most problematic. Differences existed among participants based on district size and their disciplines. No differences were found based on experience. A thorough review of policy and funding are indicated. Implications for practice include increased focus on the emphasis of training programs and technical support. Increasing placement options, consistency of information, streamlining of the individualized education program, and assistance in the evaluation and eligibility process are also needed. Because the study included participants from Oregon, generalizability is limited to the state. / Graduation date: 2003

xv, 111 p. : ill. / Despite numerous legislative and programmatic efforts, individuals with disabilities continue to experience greater difficulties gaining employment and poorer outcomes of employment than individuals without disabilities. These disparities negatively impact society. My review of the U.S. empirical research literature suggests, however, that self-employment could improve employment opportunities and outcomes for individuals with disabilities, and their success is most influenced by individual characteristics, level of supports, and accountability systems. In this dissertation study, I used a nonexperimental research design to investigate six research questions with Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) statistical analyses. Extant data on more than a million clients of vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies from the 50 states and District of Columbia for fiscal years 2003 to 2007 were obtained from the Rehabilitation Services Administration. Results of the HLM analysis indicated that among the significant (<italic>p</italic><.001) predictors of self-employment closure across the fiscal years, ethnicity had the strongest effect. The initial SEM analysis produced an inadmissible solution; the respecified model of individual characteristics, level of supports, and accountability systems produced a reasonable model fit in each fiscal year. The model invariance testing across the four U.S. Census Regions indicated a reasonable fit in each fiscal year when model parameters were freely estimated for each region, but very poor fit and significant differences were indicated when some parameters were fixed to be equal across the regions. The major limitations of this dissertation study are model misspecification in HLM and SEM and the small number of RSA fiscal years that were analyzed; causal inferences cannot be made. The primary implication of this study for researchers is using the results of the statistical analyses to develop and test theories about self-employment of individuals with disabilities through VR. The primary implication for VR is using the results to make decisions about services and agency policies. Recommendations for further research include (a) using Laplace estimation in HLM, (b) analyzing other HLM random effects and predictors, (c) testing a SEM model of different indicators and factor structure with Bayesian estimation, and (d) conducting empirical longitudinal studies given the complex developmental processes of self-employment. / Committee in charge: Richard Albin Chair; Deanne Unruh, Member; Deborah Olson, Member; Lauren Lindstrom, Member; Patricia Gwartney, Outside Member

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.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to determine school principals’ knowledge of discipline provisions of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 and to determine what additional training opportunities may be needed to ensure that school systems in the upper East Tennessee region are in compliance under IDEA. As instructional leaders, it is imperative that principals understand their responsibilities and the importance of adhering to the legal obligations under IDEA. Principals who do not comply with the act not only deny students the education to which they are entitled but also expose the school system to costly litigation. The Survey of Knowledge about the Discipline Provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments as developed by Lyons (2003) was used to obtain the middle and high school principals’ knowledge of IDEA ’97 discipline provisions. The survey instrument contained 12 demographic questions and 35 knowledge-level questions. The knowledge-level section of the survey contained seven questions from each of the five identified areas of knowledge found in the discipline provisions: (a) manifestation determinations, (b) functional behavior assessments, (c) behavior intervention plans, (d) interim alternative educational settings, and (e) general procedural safeguards. The findings of this research project were analyzed using the software program SAS System for Elementary Statistical Analysis version 8.0. Descriptive statistics in the form of total score mean and standard deviation were used to determine school principals’ knowledge of IDEA ’97's discipline amendments. The data analyzed for this study reflected that principals in the upper East Tennessee region need additional training regarding the discipline provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The provisions least understood by school administrators included: (a) manifestation determinations, (b) functional behavior assessments, (c) behavior intervention plans, (d) interim alternative educational settings, and (e) general procedural safeguards.

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.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees certain rights and protections to students with disabilities enrolled in public schools, and to their families. Even though virtual schools are one of the fastest growing trends in public k-12 education, there is evidence that these schools may not be fully implementing IDEA for enrolled students with disabilities. There has been some concern regarding the appropriateness of virtual education for student with disabilities, as well as some concern for the spectrum of services being offered in virtual schools. This case study examined the implementation of special education supports and services in one public virtual k-12 school in the United States. Interviews, document review, and participant observations were used to collect data. Findings indicated that components of IDEA were not being universally implemented for students with disabilities. Limited programming options, large special education caseloads, and an over-dependence on parents and other non-teacher adults limits students’ access to Free and Appropriate Public Education, Least Restrictive Environment, and Individualized Education Plans. Issues were also identified in the provision of Appropriate Evaluation, Parent Participation, and Procedural Safeguards. Regardless of documented challenges, benefits to virtual education were noted. Parent, faculty and staff participants reported being happier with virtual school than brick-and-mortar. Faculty enjoys easy access to a multitude of academic data. Relationships and communication among community members was reported to be stronger than what was previously experienced in brick-and-mortar schools. Faculty, staff and parent participants discussed students’ emotional and physical safety as a benefit of virtual education.

This research thesis is a policy assessment of the factors that contribute to the current status in treating autism. The policy assessment begins with a description of the key components that that influence policy outcomes in regard to autism. After developing a policy model that outlines various components of issues and approaches to the policy has on Autism, the paper examines several issues with regard to Autism policy, including the lack of insurance coverage, state legislation, waiting lists, evidence vs. non evidence treatments, and the high price for treatments. The paper also examines current approaches to Autism, and potential solutions. Solution analysis on current policy alternatives is provided and, this suggests that increasing knowledge and awareness of the affects of autism on society needs further attention along with proper funding for early treatment.