Describe_the_Applicable_Legal_Policies_and_Procedures_to_Refer_a_Student_with_a_Perceived_Impairment_for_Evaluation.

Overview The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a United States law that was created to support the learning needs of eligible children with disabilities. This law guarantees that disabled children are provided a free appropriate public education. Before IDEA was passed, most children with disabilities were placed in restrictive state institutions that accommodated persons with mental illness or retardation. These disabled children were denied access to an education that they would have otherwise received had they been healthy. Schools that offered education services for disabled children lacked the resources to effectively educate special needs students. In many cases, parents were not included in any planning and placement arrangements for their disabled student. IDEA PL 94-142 Objectives and Components IDEA, otherwise known as Public Law 94-142, “was signed into law by President Gerald Ford on November 29, 1975” (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 48) and is viewed as a “Bill of Rights” for disabled children and their families. IDEA assures that all disabled students have access to a free appropriate public education and specially designed services developed to meet their unique needs. Lastly, IDEA provides state and local governments with resources so that municipalities can provide materials and facilities to accommodate special needs children. IDEA’s support for disabled children and their families is driven by four core objectives which are: provide a free appropriate public education with an emphasis on special education and related services tailored for disabled children, provide federal assistance to state and local governments for special needs programs, assure that the rights of disabled children and parents are protected, and conduct assessments to assure that the efforts of special education programs and related services are effective in educating disabled children. For IDEA to effectively pursue these four objectives, legislators incorporated six major components and guarantees that have made a permanent and lasting impact on the education process in the United States. The following section briefly summarizes each of the six major components. Free Appropriate Public Education or FAPE means that all children regardless of their disability or severity level must be given a free and appropriate public education. This directive includes related services appropriate to the child’s disability, e.g. occupational therapy. Least Restrictive Environment or LRE assures that all disabled children (to whatever extent necessary) are to be included whenever possible with non-disabled students. Placements must be tailored to the special needs of the student. Individual Education Plan or IEP is a document that outlines an education plan for each disabled student. The documentation found in an IEP is specifically tailored to address a student’s specific disabilities. Educators work closely with parents to develop educational objectives that are customized to an individual child’s disabilities. IDEA requires the IEP to address (1) the present of level of a child’s academic performance, (2) annual goals with specific instructional objectives, (3) the educational services that will be provided, (4) the extent to which the student can take part in general education programs, (5) strategies on starting services and how long these services will be provided, (6) and an annual assessment process that specifies objective criteria which is used to check if instructional objectives are being reached. (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 49) Procedural Due Process or PDP provides parents and children with protective measures relevant to their child’s education. For instance, parents have the right to: privacy of all records, review of all records to obtain an independent assessment of their child’s needs, written notice (in the parent’s mother tongue) of recommended revisions to their child’s academic level and placement, legal representation by a lawyer and an unbiased hearing in case parents do not agree with the educational strategies being considered for their child. Nondiscriminatory Assessment is the process where a non-biased evaluation of a disabled child is conducted by a multi-disciplinary team. A multidisciplinary team is a group of professionals with expertise in all areas relevant to the presumed disability. IDEA requires that multiple assessments be given by the trained multidisciplinary team before placement occurs. Placement means assigning a student to a suitable place in a specific class at school. Placement based solely on a single evaluation is not permitted. Parental participation requires that parents fully participate in all decision-making processes in respect to their child’s education. IDEA Reauthorizations Since its passage in 1975, IDEA has been reauthorized and modified several times. This section will briefly describe and summarize the four key reauthorizations: • Public Law (PL) 99-457 (1986) • Public Law (PL) 101-476 (1997) • Public Law (PL) 105-17 (1997) • Public Law (PL) 108-446 (IDEA 2004) PL 99-457 (1986) In 1986, legislation known as Public Law 99-457 was passed by Congress as an amendment to IDEA. This law required schools to provide educational services to infants and toddlers that were identified as disabled or being at risk to develop a disability. The passage of PL 99-457 was in response to congressional data indicating that states were not taking advantage of the financial incentives that IDEA provided to facilitate educational supports and services to infants and preschool children. As mentioned earlier, from the time IDEA was passed into law, the Federal government offered states financial incentives to develop resources and related services necessary to meet the needs of preschool age disabled students. Before PL 99-457, state participation in providing special education services for disabled infants and preschoolers was minimal because Federal law did not require it. Congress’ research discovered that “less than 80 percent of the estimated 3330,000 youngsters with disabilities ages 3 to 5 were being served” (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 50). PL 99-457 resolved this issue by mandating that schools comply in providing a free and appropriate public education for all disabled children ages 3 through 5 or lose a substantial amount of federal preschool funding. By 1992-1993, all the states had services in place that met the requirement of providing a free and appropriate public education for disabled children ages 3 through 5 (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 51). Title 1 of PL 99-457 also introduced a new section called Handicapped Infants and Toddlers program (Part H), for children from birth to age 2 that are disabled or developmentally delayed. This section of PL 99-457 sets up a discretionary program that helps states launch a statewide, multidisciplinary interagency program of services for infants through age 2 and their families. For example, this program would assist a very young child who has been diagnosed with a high probability of developing a mental or physical condition, such as Down syndrome or cerebral palsy (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 51). States are not mandated to participate in Title 1 of PL 99-457 but are encouraged by the Federal government to do so. “As of September 30, 1994) all states had plans in place for the full implementation of Part H” (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 51). Impact of PL 99-457 on Parents and Children As a result of the passage of PL 99-457, very young disabled children and their families benefitted from early intervention services. Studies have shown that the greatest changes of a human’s mental and emotional health take place during the first four years of development and become the basis for all further development (Center on the Developing Child - Harvard University). PL 99-457’s focus on early intervention services provided disabled children with the opportunities to learn during a crucial time in their mental and physical development. “If the most teachable moments or stages of greatest readiness are not taken advantage of, a child may have difficulty learning a particular skill at a later time. Only through early identification and appropriate programming can children develop their potential” (Eric Digests). Early intervention also has a significant impact on the parents and siblings of a special needs child. Families commonly experience stress, disappointment, social isolation, frustration and helplessness which can affect and interfere with a disabled child's development. Early intervention programs help these families by providing them with information and skills on how to help their special needs child learn. The end result is a decrease in the family’s stress. Informed families feel better about themselves and their special needs child which results in a safer, nourishing home environment for everyone. PL 101-476 (1997) The significant contribution of Public Law 101-476 involved the renaming PL 94-142 to the “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This change was triggered by changing attitudes towards disabled persons that considered a person’s disability as just one aspect of his or her identity as a person. Consistent with this change in attitude, this legislation also replaced “children” with the term “individuals” and “handicapped” changed to “with disabilities.” Other changes implemented by PL101-476 included the expansion of its definition of services to include rehabilitation counseling and social work and adding two new disability categories, traumatic brain injury and autism. Prior to this legislation, these disabilities had been classified under other disability categories. This legislation also acknowledged the importance of preparing disabled adolescents for a productive life after they leave the public school system. The revisions required that by age 16, an individual transition plan (ITP) be part of the student’s IEP. The ITP contains goals and pre-determined activities that would help the student transition to other experiences outside the public school community like independent living, career training, and other life skills. The last amendment reverses states’ immunity from prosecution for breaching IDEA policies and procedures. Impact of 101-476 on Parents and Children The revisions instituted by PL101-476 had a long lasting impact upon parents, disabled students and the community. Parents strongly desire for their disabled children to be accepted for who they are and not be identified by their disability. Likewise, as disabled students grow older they also want to “fit in” and be treated as individuals instead of being identified by their disability. PL101-476’s revisions acknowledged this need. Parents also worry about their disabled child’s transition to a productive adult life and are unaware of vocational and community options that can help. An ITP reduces parents’ concerns by providing them with information on instruction and related services and setting post-school adult living goals for their disabled child. For example, typical goals on an ITP can include learning how to use public transportation, bill paying, grocery shopping. Disabled students, who are required to participate in the planning process, if possible, also benefit because they are asked to think about what they plan to do after they graduate high school and set goals that will help them live and work in their community. Adding autism and brain injury as distinct disability categories made it possible for children with these disabilities to receive services at a young age. Research has found that evidence of autism can appear before the age of 3 (Center on the Developing Child - Harvard University). Including autism as a separate disability category made it possible for autistic students and their parents to receive early intervention services and support so as to minimize autism’s effects on academic performance. Similarly, adding brain injury as a sanctioned disability category permitted parents to obtain services and support for their disabled child. Another significant revision implemented by PL101-476, the repeal of a state’s immunity, reinforced parents’ rights to procedural due process and made it possible for parents or others to bring a lawsuit against a state in federal court in the event they disagreed with their disabled child’s services and support arrangements or for non-compliance of IDEA. PL 105-17 (1997) In 1997, Congress passed comprehensive revisions to IDEA that resulted in restructuring IDEA into four parts. “Part A, General Provisions; Part B, Assistance for the Education of All Children with Disabilities (school age/preschool programs); Part C, Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities; and Part D, National Activities to Improve the Education of Children with Disabilities (support programs)” (Wiley Online Library – British Journal of Special Education”. This law revised several IDEA key areas that ranged from the development of IEPs to disciplining students to funding. Below is a brief summary of PL105-17’s noteworthy changes to IDEA. • Disabled students whose actions pose a threat to the safety of students, themselves, or others can be removed from their current placement for up to 45 days, only after being given a due process hearing. If a disabled student is expelled or suspended, Federal law still requires that disabled students continue to receive a free public education in agreement with their IEP. • Schools were given more flexibility to hold disabled students to the same disciplinary measures held against healthy students as long as the misconduct was not triggered by the student’s disability. • IEPs were now required to indicate how the disabled student will be involved in their education plan and document the student’s progress. Other changes included adding the general education teacher to the IEP team, changing the transition planning (ITP) age to 14 from 16, emphasizing benchmarks on the IEP, and tracking annual goals. Other changes included adding the general education teacher to the IEP team, changing the transition planning to age 14 from 16, an emphasis on benchmarks, and tracking annual goals. • Orientation and mobility services were added to the related services definition to cover the needs of visually impaired children. For example, providing schools must provide instruction in and use Braille for blind or visually impaired students. • Triennial reevaluation of disabled students was no longer considered a requirement as long as both the school and the student’s parents agreed that this process was not necessary. • A mediation services section was added and states were now required to offer mediation services as an optional alternative to resolving disagreements through costly and lengthy court hearings. Although mediation was presented as an option, parents still had the right to due process. • “Developmental delay” was added as a permissible category to describe children ages 3 to 9. This term was to be used at the discretion of state and local education agencies. • Initial evaluations to determine whether or not a student was disabled, were now permitted in addition to formal standard tests. These assessments ranged from parental feedback, teacher observations and curriculum-based tests. • Distribution of school funds was switched to a census-based formula, replacing the formula that was based on enrollment. This change was made to handle reports that some schools were “over-identifying students to receive additional funding” (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 52). • Schools were required to set up performance goals for disabled students in order to measure their academic progress and include them in statewide and district wide assessment programs or other alternative assessments suited to the student’s unique needs. Impact of 105-17 on Parents and Children Under PL105-17 parent involvement increased so that they were now included in all aspects of the decision making process that included eligibility and placement discussions. Previously, parents only had the right to participate in IEP meetings. Parents of a disabled student strongly feel that they know their child best, and therefore are better qualified to give input in the placement and services being set up for their child. When parents are invited to collaborate on all the support planning and decision making for their disabled student, conflict is kept to a minimum. Discipline enforcement for disabled students has always been a difficult area for educators and parents to find a balance. Prior to the passage of PL105-17, information on disciplinary measures toward disabled students was not clear nor were there formal guidelines in place for parents and educators to follow. Often the student’s disability is what triggers the misbehavior which proves to be a challenge for a school’s disciplinary code. In many cases, disabled students were removed from the classroom and denied an alternative education placement. This proved to be very frustrating to parents who felt that their disabled child should not be kept from instruction because of behavior. PL105-17 addressed this concern by mandating that schools “continue to provide educational services for students with disabilities whose suspension or expulsion constitutes a change in placement (usually more than 10 days in a school year)" (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 51). Schools were also given the right to remove disabled students to an alternative educational setting for up to 45 days in cases related to drugs, guns and other illegal behavior. PL105-17 gave parents more flexibility to exercise their rights by introducing mediation services as an alternative to resolving parent-school differences with a problem solving approach instead of having to resolve them in a hearing. While parents and disabled children still retained the right to legal due process, parents appreciate knowing that there is a less stressful alternative available to them if they need to advocate for their disabled child. IDEA 2004 (PL 108-446) On November 19, 2004, IDEA underwent another reauthorization known as IDEA 2004 which passed into law as Public Law 108-446 (PL 108-446) on December 2004. Some of this legislation’s changes went into effect immediately while others not until July 1, 2005. Below is a brief summary of the IDEA 2004 revisions followed by their impact on parents and their disabled children. Individualized Education Program (IEP) Process • Short-term objectives for students were replaced with “annual measurable goals” except for students who are assessed by alternative methods aligned with alternative achievement standards. • IEPs were now required to include a statement reporting a student’s present academic level and functional performance. • IEPs were now required to specify how a child’s academic progress will be measured and when will progress reports will be provided, e.g., report cards. • A member of the IEP team can be excused from attending an IEP meeting, if the school district and parents agree, because the team member’s subject area or related service is not being discussed or revised. • Telephone and Video conferencing were now allowed as alternatives for physical IEP meetings. • Changes to the IEP could be made after an IEP was established without the IEP team reconvening, as long as these changes were submitted in writing. • Transition services now were required to begin at age 16, and must include appropriate post secondary goals relevant to education, employment, training and where suitable, independent living skills. • In an effort to reduce paperwork, IDEA 2004 permits schools districts with parental consent to develop comprehensive multiyear IEPs valid for up to 3 years. • IDEA 2004 assigned responsibility to the U.S. Department of Education to oversee the developing and distribution of model IEP and IFSP forms. Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities School districts were now permitted to identify a child for a possible learning disability by using scientific research based interventions that have been empirically validated. This procedure was known as “response to intervention” and allowed schools to apply instructional intervention programs to detect if a child has a learning disability instead of relying solely on the child’s IQ and performance on standardized achievement tests. If the child’s performance fails to make adequate progress, it is assumed that a learning disability is present. Highly Qualified Special Education Teachers IDEA 2004 identifies the criteria for a “highly qualified” special educator. These requirements also correspond with the standards implemented in the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Below is a brief summary of who is considered a “highly qualified” teacher based on IDEA 2004’s requirements. • In order to be considered “highly qualified”, a special education teacher must have a bachelor’s degree and be fully certified in special education or licensed to teach SPED. • Elementary special education teachers who provide instruction in core subjects must pass their state’s certification or licensing exam in that specific subject to be considered “highly qualified.” This ensures that teachers are only assigned to subjects that they have proven themselves to be competent. • Middle school and High School Special Education teachers, who teach students with significant cognitive deficits, can be considered highly qualified as long as they meet the NCLB standards for elementary teachers. • Special educators who currently only teach multiple core subjects can be considered “highly qualified” after passing “a single high-objective uniform state standard of evaluation (HOUSSE) which covers several subject areas. • Special educators already deemed “highly qualified” in a single core subject have the option of applying for “highly qualified” status in the remaining core subjects. • No “highly qualified” guidelines are provided on early childhood special educators. Discipline • PL 108-46 requires schools to place students in an alternative education setting if they have been suspended from school for more than 10 days. • School officials are now permitted to remove any pupil who commits offenses involving weapons and drugs (including those with and without disabilities) for up to 45 days and place them in an interim alternative educational setting (IAES). • The 45 day placement in an IAES is now considered as 45 school days as opposed to 45 calendar days. • PL 108-46 removed the language that required an IEP team to review whether the student’s disability affected how he or she controlled her behavior or understood the consequences of his or her choices. Schools are still required to conduct a manifestation determination (MDR), a meeting which is required whenever a student is removed from their regular placement in a public school for 10 days or more. However, IEP teams will now just be required to make two inquiries: (1) Did the student’s disability have a direct and substantial correlation to the offense' (2) Was the misbehavior a consequence of the school’s neglect to apply the IEP' (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 59). • PL 108-46 revised the “stay put” law to keep a student in alternative placement even if parents or the local education agency (LEA) request an appeal to the placement or manifest determination decision. The “stay put” law gives the school or law enforcement agency the authority to keep a student, who is considered a safety threat, in alternative placement, until a decision is reached by the hearing officer or the IAES time period expires. Due Process PL 108-446 modified some of IDEA 1997’s “due process” provisions. The revisions are summarized below. • A two-year statute of limitations was imposed on parents who want to file a due process compliant. • A school district is now required to hold a “resolution session” that includes parents and IEP team members, within 15 days of being notified of a due process complaint. If the complaint is not resolved by 30 days of the filing date, then a due process hearing will take place. • In cases where parents win their complaint in court, IDEA 2004 now allows school districts to collect legal costs from parents, the parents’ attorney, or the court if the complaint is determined to be trivial or filed for as a harassment ploy. Evaluation of Students • School districts are now required to assess whether a student is a candidate for special education within 60 days (except in cases where the state has already determined a timeline) to complete an assessment. Reassessment of a student’s eligibility for special education services is limited to once per year, except when parents and the school district agree to alternative terms. • IDEA 2004 now requires that evaluations be conducted whenever feasible in the preferred language of the parent or student in order to obtain most accurate information possible on a child’s capabilities. • If parents refuse special education services, school districts are not permitted to make any attempts at a dispute resolution. If parents turn down special education services, then schools are not obligated to provide a free and appropriate public education for the student. Assessment Participation All students with disabilities are required to participate in all state and district sponsored assessments (including the assessments required by the No Child Left Behind Act, PL 107-110). State and local education agencies are permitted to offer alternative assessments or accommodations as dictated by the student’s IEP. Additionally, IDEA 2004 mandates that assessments follow universal design of instruction standards to the greatest extent possible. Impact of IDEA 2004 on Parents and Children IDEA 2004 amendments benefited parents and disabled students in some areas and were detrimental to them in others. For instance, many changes in the IEP process were justified as solutions to reducing the bureaucratic and paperwork burden on educators and parents. For example, legislators thought that by eliminating short-term objectives on an IEP, they were helping parents and educators streamline the IEP process. The effect was exactly the opposite. Teachers and parents found these short-term objectives as a helpful checklist to measure their child’s progress. Without these objectives, parents have no way of measuring periodically if their child is meeting established annual goals. In fact, parents will have greater difficulty in receiving school progress reports because teachers will not have a guideline to follow to determine whether remedial steps need to be taken to help a student achieve their annual goals (Families and Advocates Partnership for Education). Other IEP revisions, ranging from the introduction of multi-year IEPs to IEP team members being excused from meetings because their subject area will not be discussed, may cause parents to think that local and state education agencies are more concerned about diminishing paperwork than focusing on supporting their child’s special needs. Benefits to parents and disabled children enacted by IDEA 2004 provisions included adding to the IEP how a student’s progress will be measured and how often progress reports will be issued. This revision offsets the loss of short-term objectives because parents will have the benefit of being informed what instructional methodologies will be used to teach their child and if necessary provide input. Another positive outcome of IDEA 2004 was the requirement that stated special education teachers must take professional development courses to pass competency and certification exams on the core subject they teach. This provision protects students from being taught by teachers that are teaching outside of their subject area. Consequently, disabled children can be more effective at school because they are receiving instruction from a teacher who has the expertise to help them achieve academic success (United States Department of Education). The Referral and Evaluation Process Typically, a referral process is initiated by a teacher based on his or her concern over a student’s academic progress, social/behavioral problems, or cultural /linguistic issues. Before the teacher formally initiates the referral process, the teacher first reviews the student’s school records, continues to observe the child in class, and tries to use pedagogical skills to develop and apply strategies that can help the student. The teacher documents his or her classroom observations and strategies to assess if there is any progress. If the teacher feels that despite all his or her efforts the student continues to struggle, he or she initiates a pre-referral intervention. A pre-referral intervention is a collaborative strategy that is attempted before a referral for special education services is submitted. This process involves the special educators, administrators and other school personnel, referred to as the intervention assistance team who collaborate and document strategies to effectively help the student. If the intervention assistance team’s strategies are successful, the process ends here, since no formal referral is needed. In the event that the pre-referral interventions are not successful, the next step involves formally initiating a referral. A referral is “a written request to evaluate a student to determine whether the child has a disability” (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 63). .A referral is usually initiated by school personnel, however parents or other concerned adults can start this process too. IDEA mandates that a school submit a written request in the parents/guardian’s native language asking permission to evaluate their child. If this request is denied, the student must remain in his or her current placement, however a school may proceed with a due process hearing. If a parent consents to an evaluation of their child, the formal referral request is completed. The next step is to conduct assessments on the student to identify his or her strengths and needs. Per IDEA, the assessment process must be conducted by a multidisciplinary team. A multidisciplinary team consists of professionals that must also include a teacher. For example, professionals could be psychologists, education diagnosticians and others with a specific area of expertise. The multidisciplinary team evaluates a student by administering norm and criterion-referenced tests. Norm-referenced tests are a type of standardized test that evaluate a student’s performance against a representative sample of their peers. Norm-reference test results are presented as percentile ranks, grade equivalent scores, or stanines (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 66). Norm-referenced test data provides limited information to evaluators because the student’s score is compared against a small group of students instead of all students who have been tested. In contrast, criterion-referenced tests provide data that indicates how well a student has learned a specific set of skills and the areas where he or she needs additional instruction. Teachers prefer to base their instruction on criterion referenced tests that indicate the mastery level of a student instead of how a student compares with his peers (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 66). After the appropriate assessments have been administered, the next step involves the multidisciplinary team determining whether the student qualifies for special education services based on specific state criteria. If a student does not meet the state criteria to qualify for special education services, the student will continue in his or her current placement. Parents must be notified in writing that their child was not eligible for special education services. The law gives parents the right to appeal by due process. Although a student was deemed ineligible for special educations services, the school can still develop intervention strategies and recommend accommodations based on the concerns indicated on the referral. An example of an intervention strategy is the 504 plan, which refers to “the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and American Disabilities Act” (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 69) which indicate that no disabled person can be left out of federally funded schools. A 504 plan lists what modifications and accommodations must be put in place so that the student can have a chance to function at the same level as their peers. Examples of accommodations include wheelchair ramps and blood sugar monitoring. However, if a student is found eligible for special education services, the next step is the development of an Individualized Education Plan. An Individualized Education Plan is a comprehensive strategy developed, within 30 days after student’s disability has been assessed, to provide the support appropriate for the individual needs of students ages 3 and up. IEPs are the primary means of making sure schools provide a specially designed academic program for students with special needs. An IEP is written by a team that must include parents or guardian, and at least have a general education and special education teacher, a school district representative, a person who can translate the educational terminology. Students and other professionals who can contribute their expertise may participate with the parent’s or school’s permission. The IEP team collaborates on developing a strategic academic plan that addresses the individual’s unique needs. While IEPs will vary in content, format, and detail, IDEA 2004 requires IEPs to identify what the student should be accomplishing within an academic year. All IEPs should include 5 components that indicate: identifying the student (the who), what the student will do (behavior), to what intensity or degree (criterion), under what setting (the conditions), and the time taken to accomplish these goals (the time frame) (Gargiulo, 2009, p. 70). IEPs are reviewed annually unless parents request to meet earlier. Federal law requires that the IEP be reevaluated every 3 years. However, PL108-446 waives this requirement if parents and school officials feel a three year review is unnecessary. After the IEP is written, parents and school staff collaborate on what academic setting best fits their child's unique needs. The placement selected must be an environment that allows a student to achieve his or her IEP goals. However, there is no one educational setting that can effectively help a disabled student reach his or her goals. For instruction to be effective, a student must be placed in a variety of academic settings customized to accommodate the individual requirements of each disabled student. These various educational placement settings are referred to as a “cascade of delivery services.” This term describes the placement strategy that puts disabled students in different academic settings that can change as the needs of the student changes. Different types of services may include a resource room, co-taught classes, and accommodations in a regular class. If the school or parents disagree with the placement, they have the option to due process and the student remains in the regular classroom. If parents and the school are in agreement, then services for the disabled student are initiated. After placement and services are initiated, an annual review of an IEP or triennial evaluation (depending on the situation) is done and revisions are made if necessary.   Resources Center on the Developing Child - Harvard University. (n.d.) Understanding Intervention. Retrieved December 22, 2010 from http://developingchild.harvard.edu/topics/understanding_intervention/ Eric Digests Organization. (n.d.) Does Early Intervention Help' ERIC Digest #455. Retrieved December 22, 2010 from http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/help.htm/ Families and Advocates Partnership for Education. (n.d.) IDEA 2004 Summary. Retrieved December 22, 2010 from http://www.fape.org/idea/2004/summary.htm/ Gargiulo, Richard M. (2009). Special education in contemporary society: an introduction to exceptionality Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. United States Department of Education. (2004). What does it mean to be a "highly qualified" teacher' Retrieved December 22, 2010 from http://www2.ed.gov/teachers/how/tools/initiative/updates/040614.html Wiley Online Library – British Journal of Special Education. (n.d.) Focus on Practice: Parent and Teacher Perceptions of Individualised Transition Planning. Retrieved December 22, 2010 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8527.00255/abstract