Strategies to Avoid Disciplinary Removals for Students with IEPsby Jessica Nichols, Education Consultant, Wisconsin DPI, Daniel Parker, Assistant Director of Special Education Division for Learning Support, Wisconsin DPI and Elizabeth Cook, School Psychology Consultant, Wisconsin DPI The primary vision of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction is to support schools in ensuring all students are college and career ready. For many students, this vision will be easily attainable; they come to school with internal and external factors that align to our educational standards without much difficulty. Other students, however, struggle with achieving this vision. This is not for lack of wanting to be successful in school, but because of other factors that become barriers to the pathway to success. Students with IEPs fall within a vulnerable population of students who are more likely to find themselves not achieving their full potential. This is particularly true for students who exhibit behavioral challenges. As educators, we can support these students through appropriate supports, careful planning, and maintaining high expectations. Through this work we can ensure that all students have equitable access to the mission and vision of our educational institutions. Students with IEPs are three times more likely to be suspended and twice as likely to be expelled when compared to their non-disabled peers. When looking specifically at students with emotional behavioral disabilities, this number becomes over three times higher. Additionally, recent data shows that 75% of seclusion and restraint incidences involve students with IEPs. This disproportionate data is particularly true for our students of color who, on the whole, are more likely to incur exclusionary discipline than white students. Finally, research shows that students who do not attend school regularly have more difficulties mastering content, are more likely to drop out, and generally have poorer outcomes than students who attend school regularly. Through this data, it is easy to see how the pathway to becoming college and career ready is more difficult for our students receiving Special Education services. Fortunately, educators have resources available to them to help support students who are struggling, reducing the need to rely on exclusionary discipline practices and instead focus on positive interventions that have been proven to improve student engagement, reduce behavior concerns, and ensure better outcomes for students. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Wisconsin state statute includes provisions that explicitly address the need for a proactive approach to meeting the behavioral needs of students. (See Information Bulletin 07.01 on Addressing the Behavioral Needs of Students with Disabilities.) Any time a student’s behavior impedes his or her learning or the learning of others, the IEP team must consider the use of positive behavioral interventions, supports and strategies to address the behavior. This applies to any student with an IEP, not solely to students with emotional behavioral disabilities. In further guidance, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) issued a Dear Colleague letter in August 2016, reminding educators that inappropriate behaviors, including those that violate the code of conduct for disrupting class, are indications that behavioral supports may be needed. (See Information Update Bulletin 06.02 for specific guidance pertaining to Legal Requirements Relating to Disciplining Children with Disabilities.) A functional behavioral assessment (FBA) is a useful tool to address the behavioral needs of students. Through the use of FBA, teams work together to uncover environmental changes that would ensure a student can achieve the high expectations set forth by the school. A FBA can also identify the skill gaps demonstrated by students and make suggestions for explicit instruction in the area of social, cognitive, and emotional skills. Finally, the FBA can identify which approaches work best to help students deescalate during crisis situations. Conducting a good and useful FBA requires collaboration with all stakeholders, including educators, families and the students themselves. By embedding the 3 C’s, Curiosity, Connection, and Co-Planning, as outlined in Wisconsin’s School Mental Health Framework into our process of behavioral analysis, teams gather a deeper understanding of the problem and subsequently, are able to develop a more effective and sustainable support plan. Shifting from asking ‘what behavior am I trying to modify’ to ‘what problem am I trying to solve’ is key in the development of effective plans. By considering the match between the environmental demands and the student’s current skills and abilities, teams can target interventions and modifications to support those difficulties. There are many resources available to help teams think through this process including Ross Greene’s Lives in the Balance and Robert Brooks (http://www.drrobertbrooks.com/) among others. Additionally, resources are available on the Department’s website including FBA Toolkit, Emotional Regulation Plans and trauma sensitive schools. After gathering information from an FBA, teams develop Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP) and adjust IEP contents including, but not limited to, specially designed instruction, related services, supplementary aids and services, program modifications and/or supports for school personnel. It is the IEP Team’s responsibility to create and implement an individual plan that includes proactive supports as well as reactive behavior management. By infusing the 3 C’s throughout a student’s BIP and IEP, teams are setting themselves up for a greater probability of not just reducing behavior concerns, but also effectively solving problems and increasing achievement. Individual BIPs are most effective when rooted in strong universal practice aimed at creating and sustaining a positive, predictable, consistent, and safe environment for all. It is important for students with IEPs to have access to all of the same universal supports other students benefit from, including those associated with PBIS and Wisconsin’s School Mental Health Framework. Additional supports should emphasize building skills and social emotional learning, connected to and built upon the expectations of all students. Using a continuous improvement process, teams should regularly reflect on the content of the BIP and IEP and make program adjustments on an ongoing basis, as determined by the relative success the student is experiencing. In addition to FBAs and BIPs, there are additional strategies school teams and Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams can utilize to support the behavior needs of students with IEPs. First, school teams should disaggregate discipline data for students with IEPs to explore the reasons why a student is being removed from the classroom. This analysis may lead to discoveries of behavior patterns that are either “subjective” (e.g. threat, disrespect, noise) versus “objective” (e.g. hitting, obscene language, vandalism, leaving without permission). For “subjective” behavior referrals, school teams can engage in discussions of cultural differences in language and behavior expectations that might underlay these behaviors and lead to a discussion of culturally responsive practices. Disaggregating discipline data may also identify specific settings, activities, courses, or other circumstances when behaviors are more likely to occur. This could lead school teams to identify additional training for school staff such as trauma sensitive schools learning modules, learning how to support a specific type of disability-related need such as self-regulation, or identify a need for more clarity on behavior expectations in specific settings (e.g. visual signs or reminders in specific locations of the school). An additional strategy for IEP teams is to ensure a thorough root cause analysis of any behaviors that impede student learning. Root cause analysis is a process to determine “why” a behavior occurs for an individual student. Thus, it is not sufficient for an IEP team to only name the effects of a disability (e.g. leaving without permission, aggression towards peers, excessive noise). The IEP team must go on to identify disability-related need(s) that are impacting the student’s access, engagement, and progress in general education curriculum and environments. For example, there may be many individual reasons “why” a student is making excessive noise (e.g. need to communicate, over-stimulation, speech, and language related need, etc.). Without identifying the root cause, an IEP team will have difficulty writing a clear IEP goal to address student needs. IEP goals should assist IEP teams in teaching a skill to a student (e.g. self-regulation) so that the student does not show the “effect” of their disability (e.g. excessive noise). IEP goals that only state the goal of reducing or eliminating a behavior often do not provide IEP teams and educators with enough information to address the skills or supports that are at the root cause of an individual student’s behavior. When aligning IEP services that address IEP goals based on root causes, or disability-related needs, IEP teams are strongly encouraged to address disability-related needs through both a service (e.g. a skill that is taught to a student) as well as accommodations (e.g. something that the student can access that will help reduce or redirect a behavior such as a visual or sensory support, extra time, home base, etc.). IEP teams and the educators who support students with IEPs in classrooms may want to explore additional strategies that lead to reductions in disciplinary removals such as providing choice during the day, supporting relationships between adults and peers, modeling strength based and positive language when speaking to and about students with behavior related needs, providing frequent breaks and options for movement, and ensuring curriculum is relevant and engaging. Finally, educators must ensure their own self-care when supporting students with the most significant needs for behavior related support. Educators can model self-regulation strategies and self-talk for students when educators find themselves in stressful situations. Similarly, educators can co-regulate when students become anxious or have early signs of engaging in behaviors that might lead to removals. Co-regulating in early stages of a behavior cycle provides students with non-verbal strategies and space to de-escalate and helps to ensure educators do not say or do anything that may further escalate students into a behavior that may then lead to a disciplinary removal. Administrators also have a role in supporting self-care of educators through scheduling, modeling and encouraging self-care, and providing additional resources to staff. It is important to remember that failure to address the behavioral needs of a student with a disability can result in both a denial of Free and Appropriate Publication Education (FAPE) and a denial of placement in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). This includes obvious exclusions such as suspensions and expulsions. However, districts are wise to consider subtle exclusions masking as proactive supports for students. Examples include shortening the school day, particularly when there is no plan for elongating the day, utilizing in-school suspension, or requesting that a caregiver pick the child up so the child can regulate in a different environment. Although many of these strategies are used with good intentions, the outcomes are that students are not accessing their education, thus contributing to negative academic, social, and emotional outcomes we are trying to avoid, and may result in a denial of FAPE. (See Information Bulletin 14.03 for more information on Shortened School Day.) Addressing the behavioral needs of students is a complex and ongoing process. Teams supporting the most successful student outcomes are committed to infusing curiosity, connection and co-planning into their work in order to accurately address environmental factors and effectively teach to gaps in skills. They place emphasis on creating a place where students have a sense of belonging, purpose, connection, and safety. And they all believe in the capacity of each and every student to achieve their full and unique potential.
Jessica Nichols has worked supporting functional and social-emotional learning for over ten years in the fields of mental health, early intervention, and special education. As an education consultant for the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Jess provides training and support in the areas of autism, emotional behavioral disabilities, trauma, and mental health. She is an ACE Interface Master Trainer and has served as a Nonviolent Crisis Intervention Trainer. Jess is especially interested in meaningful family engagement, early identification, and interventions for autism and working with parents and teachers to implement successful positive behavior support strategies. She is a firm believer that, as Dr. Ross Greene says, “Kids Do Well If They Can,” and that we as educators have the capacity and influence to support all learners as they achieve their dreams.
Read more at: Elementary Edition - Secondary Edition - District Level Edition |