formal and informal assessments. All the placement decisions are based on students’ IEP goals and objectives, so each placement is unique to each student. General and special education teachers also use co-teaching models in inclusion classrooms to accept roles and responsibilities for the multitiered supports (Karten & Murawski, 2020).
Legislation drives many decisions regarding inclusion. For example, No Child Left Behind (NCLB; 2002) was the main educational law from 2002 to 2015. It advocated for high outcomes for all students to narrow achievement gaps. The intention was for prepared educators to deliver a quality education to all students. NCLB included a system of accountability that demanded increasingly successful learning opportunities for students with disabilities in general education settings. This emphasis on accountability caused many school systems to revamp their inclusion programs. Then, the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; 2017) replaced NCLB with a major focus on positive student outcomes, closing achievement gaps, and increasing equity and instruction quality (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.).
RTI, along with other systems of academic, social, and emotional supports, services, and interventions, is set up to assist teachers in providing a quality education to all learners. When educators view all students as general education students, all students will receive solid core instruction. Screenings and assessments will identify and document students who need further supports and instruction, and they receive additional academic and behavioral interventions, as needed.
Laws such as IDEA (2004b), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973), and the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA; 1991) extend accommodations and modifications to students with disabilities in school environments and other public and private settings. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 offers accommodations and modifications to the academic setting or environment. Case managers, teachers, and related service providers collaborate with the student’s family to determine the appropriate placements and related services, which include accommodations for instruction, assessments, and environmental supports. Adaptations include accommodations and modifications. Accommodations do not change the learning outcomes for a student or the content (what is taught), while modifications alter what students are expected to learn. For example, a mathematics accommodation allows a student to solve two-step multiplication word problems assigned over a period of two days due to low attention or stamina, while a modified mathematics assignment requires the student to solve one-step word problems that have less complexity and simplified wording.
IEPs and 504 plans are unique to each student with a disability and a team develops the types of placements, supports, accommodations, modifications, and related services the student will require to reach his or her fullest potential. These supports can include services such as the following.
• Providing a student with ADHD more frequent breaks during a longer assessment
• Offering increased feedback about organizational skills to a student who lacks executive functioning skills
• Setting up an informal behavioral plan for a student who is impulsive
• Scheduling a school psychologist or guidance counselor to check in more frequently with a student who is depressed
• Consulting with an occupational therapist if a student with autism needs help with routines or cannot easily transition from one activity or class to the next
• Ensuring a student in a wheelchair can access books on higher shelves in a media center
• Adapting the physical education program
• Highlighting important information
• Providing seating options to avoid glare or distractions
• Scheduling sensory breaks
• Sharing written or picture schedules
When IEPs align to the general education curriculum, but are not individualized, their purpose is diminished (Auman-Bauer, 2018). IEPs are not magical documents that automatically ensure students will achieve by the presence of formal signatures and agreements to adhere to agreed-on goals. Some IEPs and 504 plans are not meaningfully written, individualized, or comprehensive enough if they do not include pertinent assessment information, baseline data, or appropriate accommodations (Capizzi, 2008; Karten, 2019a).
In addition, IDEA only requires IEP teams to place short-term objectives in IEPs of students who take an alternate assessment that aligns to alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS). This assessment needs to include challenging state grade-level academic standards. AA-AAS may not exceed 1 percent of the total number of all students assessed in such a subject in the state, which is approximately 10 percent of students with disabilities (National Center on Educational Outcomes, n.d.).
The following list offers examples of alternate achievement standards across the content areas and grade levels for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
• A first-grade student circles consonant digraphs in a word list as an alternative to taking a spelling test of words with consonant digraphs.
• A fourth-grade student shades in the inside of a rectangle instead of applying the area formula.
• An eighth-grade student sequences story visuals in lieu of writing a three-paragraph essay.
• An eleventh-grade chemistry student identifies acids and bases by sorting materials such as lemons and milk products instead of explaining how acids and bases are neutralized.
ESSA permits, but does not require, states to develop alternate achievement standards (CPIR and Advocacy Institute, 2017). Assessment accommodations are specified in a student’s IEP with high expectations as close as possible to grade-level standards. Most important to keep in mind is that IEPs are worthwhile educational road maps when educators continually review and amend them based on students’ progress and ongoing needs. Together, parent voices and legal mandates can provide educators with a blueprint for more productive relationships with families when they collaboratively plan the IEPs (MacLeod, Causton, Radel, & Radel, 2017). Overall, IEPs provide effective and appropriate education by supporting individual learner needs. Progress is then monitored and communicated to families.
There are thirteen classifications of disability under IDEA (Part B) to provide the special education and related services for students aged three to twenty-one (IDEA, 2004a). Section 619 of Part B defines the preschool program, which guarantees a free and appropriate public education to children with disabilities ages three to five (National Center for Learning Disabilities, n.d.). IDEA Part C denotes early interventions for infants and toddlers. A child’s school performance is “adversely affected” by a disability in one of these thirteen categories (Lee, 2020). These categories offer definitions, characteristics, and traits, but they do not define the uniqueness of each student, whether or not he or she shares a category of disability. Students who qualify for one category of disability, but whose needs can’t be met exclusively in one category, will receive services under multiple disabilities. Students may also be classified under one category, yet have some characteristics of another disability. For example, a student with an intellectual disability or autism may also have speech and language impairment and require additional supports and services.
The following thirteen categories are used for eligibility and to ensure that students with disabilities receive the legislative IDEA protections and related services (IDEA, 2004a).
1. Autism
2. Traumatic brain injury (TBI)
3. Deaf-blindness
