Sam: In certain Tennessee districts, special education students are in full inclusion with no pull-out because of RTI classes, even though their IEP states that the student is getting special education services for a specified time. Special education teachers are being told to slip in the word consultation on the IEPs. Is this legal? These children are in regular classrooms with students of all levels without any one-on-one help.
Not sure on legality, but it is a matter of best practices not being implemented. We can NOT write consultation on our IEPs, as it is not a measurable time. Also, ideal best practices would have the gen ed working on the SDI, while student is in that class – makes sense as they are the content expert. Full inclusion is the thing these days, with not one, one size fits all model. At some point, the SPED staff should be working, or consulting with the teachers where the students are. We try to focus on our target – 9th and 10th core classes.
In some states there is a placement option called “mainstream”. What you describe sounds like this placement option. Typically, no specific amount of time for consultation or support is listed.
Sam, I’m confused. From your description, these children have IEPs but are in regular ed classes with no special ed services.
But the students’ IEPs must include specific information including present levels of achievement and functional performance, measurable annual goals, how the child’s progress will be measured and when the parents will receive progress reports, a statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services that will be provided to the child, if the child needs an alternate assessment, accommodations and modifications. (see Individualized Education Programs, pages 99-101 in Wrightslaw: Special Education Law)
The IEPs also must include “frequency, location, and duration of those services and modifications . . .” What do the IEPs say about these requirements?
BTW: RTI is NOT a special ed service.