Including Students with IEPs in an Equitable Multi Level System of Supports

by Lynn Winn, Education Consultant – Systems Change, Division for Learning Support, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

I was in the 5th grade in 1975, the year PL 94-142 was implemented to guarantee free appropriate public education to each child with a disability. Due to overcrowding in my school, that fall I began attending a newly constructed elementary school built with this anticipated legislation in mind. There was an entire wing designed especially for the kids with the most significant disabilities, containing not just desks and books but therapy balls, wheelchairs, and parallel bars. I hadn’t been in the presence of someone with a visible disability before, and became quickly intrigued by the unique and separate education they received. Instead of pursuing the traditional rite of passage as a safety patrol that year, I volunteered during lunch recess as a peer model. My school’s interpretation of least restrictive environment at the time invited kids without disabilities to walk over to that part of the building and either tutor or engage socially with the kids with disabilities. Inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education classrooms with any genuine intent was (and often still is) outside the paradigm of what it meant to provide an appropriate education for every student.

Fast forward 27 years to 2001 and the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education, a landmark report in shaping the way we think about and deliver educational services. The report set us on a course for developing multi level systems of supports to ensure success for every student by prioritizing the need to 1) embrace a model of prevention rather than failure and 2) view students with disabilities as general education students first. The model of prevention rather than failure is operationalized through implementing an equitable multi level system of supports. In contrast to the reactive approach of waiting for students to fail and then providing support, a system of supports provides equitable services, practices and resources to every student based on their responsiveness to effective instruction and intervention throughout their educational experience. An effective system of supports inherently recognizes students with disabilities as general education students first, a proactive approach to the struggle we experience in moving toward meaningful inclusion under a wait to fail model.

Today, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides a more articulated definition of what it means to provide an appropriate education for students with disabilities. Meaningful inclusion supports opportunities for students with disabilities to learn alongside rather than just be in the presence of, their non-disabled peers in general education environments. These days most schools provide some form of a continuum of educational experiences for students based on their academic, social, and emotional needs. Wisconsin’s Framework for Equitable Multi Level Systems of Supports (MLSS) defines eleven key features of a system for maximizing the success of every student. Special education services are integral to developing a successful system of supports and ensures students with disabilities are provided the specialized supports they need in addition to what is delivered universally to every learner.

One of the pitfalls in an IEP team determining a student has an educational disability and the need for special education is the tendency to believe that the disability label in and of itself renders a student less capable of mastering age or grade level standards. Variations in ability are after all social constructs, ideas widely accepted but not necessarily representative of reality. Thus, rather than removing disability related barriers to allow for access to grade level learning as special education was intended, we tend to stop teaching to grade level standards and teach students with disabilities at their current level of attainment. This well-intentioned shift in instructional practice has resulted in a perpetual gap between them and their peers who have not been given a disability label. This shift in instructional practice also reinforces the implicit biases (unconscious attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions) we hold that contribute to lowered expectations for students with disabilities.

High quality instruction within an equitable multi level system of supports is defined the same for students with a disability as for those without a disability. Thus, recognizing students with disabilities as general education students first means providing them with curriculum, instruction, and assessment that is:

  • engaging and differentiated through principles of universal design for learning,
  • standards based,
  • data driven,
  • research or evidence based, and
  • culturally and linguistically responsive to the student being instructed.

High quality instruction ensures meaningful access by students with disabilities to the same rigorous, standards based, grade level instruction provided to students without disabilities. This includes students with significant disabilities who may be supported through modified instruction or, for a very small number of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, instruction aligned with alternative standards.

Unfortunately, meaningful access is often interpreted as simply ensuring students with disabilities are physically placed in the presence of high quality instruction provided to students without disabilities in general education settings. In contrast, meaningful access for students with disabilities within an equitable system ensures:

  • opportunities to use and benefit from instructional materials and services provided in any setting (general education, special education, community and vocational),
  • age and/or grade level learning expectations are maintained (developmental, academic, behavioral, social, and emotional),
  • progress is made in mastery of grade level standards,
  • participation in general education settings to the maximum extent appropriate with reasonable accommodations and supports to remove barriers that may preclude access to meaningful participation, and
  • instruction is connected to grade level standards and the universal curriculum when delivered in a setting other than general education.

To accomplish this, special education services, which include specially designed instruction, related services, supplementary aids and services, and program modifications and supports for staff are integrated within a well-designed and equitable multi level system of supports (MLSS). They can be found throughout the continuum, levels, or tiers depending on how a system is defined, and look different for each student with a disability. For example, specially designed instruction is one form of tier three, or intensive intervention within an equitable MLSS determined by a student’s IEP team as necessary to address that student’s disability-related needs. Since the purpose of specially designed instruction is to remove barriers to learning and progress toward mastery of grade level academic, social, and emotional standards, the vast majority of students with disabilities are best served within general education settings most of the time and assessed in relation to grade level standards. Thus, specially designed instruction may look essentially the same as an intensive general education intervention if a student with an IEP has a disability-related need for a targeted skill that is the same as a peer without a disability. In this instance, an outside observer might see no difference in the instructional experience of both students. Specially designed instruction is typically provided when a student’s needs in a particular area are intensive and interventions are more likely to require sustained time and effort in order for the student to maintain adequate rates of progress over time. Another important distinction is that special education is a civil right for students with disabilities under IDEA who have historically been marginalized, excluding them from accessing the free appropriate public education available to their non-disabled peers. An important consideration is that while students with disabilities are receiving specially designed instruction, they continue to have meaningful access to all the resources available to students without disabilities within the school and district. This is best accomplished when special and general educators collaborate on instructional design for all students. The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction provides additional guidance on the role of special education in an equitable multi level system of supports on their website.

With meaningful inclusion and access for students with disabilities so clearly defined, what prevents us from providing it consistently?  Advancing equity for students with disabilities within an MLSS invites a journey of discovery that begins with an authentic examination of our beliefs about ability, some of which are known to us with others lingering just below what we state consciously. Examining the disconnect between what we say we believe and what we do in service to students with disabilities is one way Wisconsin’s Model to Inform Culturally Responsive Practice operationalizes this journey. The eight areas of action, when examined and leveraged through the lens of ability, guide the user through knowing oneself, learning about others, and then moving to action in ways that ensure students with disabilities are provided the high quality education available to their non-disabled peers. In essence, everything we need to effectively educate every student is at our disposal. When we deepen our understanding of what every student needs and leverage our resources accordingly equity will no longer be a goal, it will be a given.

 

Read more at: 

Elementary Edition - Secondary Edition - District Level Edition