October, 1995
Dear Superintendents of Schools:
I am taking this opportunity to commend your efforts to provide high quality programs and services for all students, including students with special needs. I particularly wish to acknowledge the efforts that school districts have engaged in to provide professional development for better utilization of pre-referral techniques, and creation and expansion of opportunities for more inclusive classrooms. I know that it is a difficult task to provide high quality educational programs for students with special needs. I will continue to try to offer support in these areas and to be responsive to the technical assistance needs of school districts.
As you know, during the 1994-95 school year, staff of the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) visited Massachusetts to monitor the Department of Education's overall activities in meeting the requirements of Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Massachusetts Department of Education received OSEP's report this spring, reviewed the findings, and developed a corrective action plan (CAP) in June of 1995.
As part of the CAP, the Massachusetts Department of Education (DOE) has agreed to inform all school districts of OSEP's monitoring findings. To accomplish this, we prepared the enclosed technical assistance booklet in which each area identified in the Massachusetts' CAP for school district action has been addressed. It is our hope that this focus on specific issues will ensure that our overall program is consistent with federal laws and regulations, and will provide Massachusetts school districts with extra assistance in the areas OSEP identified as needing attention. Briefly, areas of attention include ensuring that:
Sections 10 and 11 provide additional assistance regarding the education of students who are blind or have limited vision, and students who are deaf or hard of hearing. This information is included as a result of discussions with the Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind, and other interested organizations.
Please read each section carefully, meet with your administrative team, consider your current practices and, if necessary, make changes to ensure that your practices are consistent with the law. The Department will be conducting integrated program reviews in school districts and these areas of law or regulation will be reviewed. The Department will be pleased to provide further technical assistance at your request. If you have questions, Department staff in Instruction and Curriculum Services and in Program Quality Assurance will assist you.
I acknowledge and appreciate the many positive actions and activities that Massachusetts schools have been engaged in to ensure high quality educational programs for all students. I look forward to working with you as we continue these efforts.
Sincerely,
Robert V. Antonucci
Commissioner of Education
State: [[paragraph]]300 of the Chapter 766 Regulations requires an "ever-current register of children in need of special education." [[paragraph]]302.0 requires that a student who has been evaluated, determined to be in need of special education, and has a current IEP be entered immediately to that register.
The Department recommends that at least annually, in October and November, each school district review all entries to the register to ensure that the December count will be accurate and unduplicated.
In cases where it is determined that an incorrect count of students has been submitted, the Department will determine appropriate action which may include recovery of that portion of the federal funds which was awarded based upon the incorrect count.
State: A number of paragraphs in the Chapter 766 Regulations relate to this requirement, which is one element of serving a student with special needs in the least restrictive environment. Most specifically, [[paragraph]]322.22(b) says that the "prototype and program selected shall be the least restrictive environment consistent with [[paragraph]]500." [[paragraph]]500 defines special education and echoes the federal language provided above.
[[paragraph]]322.22(c) states "If a 502.4, 502.4(i), 502.5 or 502.6 prototype is designated, the TEAM shall state the basis for its conclusion that education of the child in a less restrictive environment with the use of supplementary aids and services could not be achieved satisfactorily."
We believe the term "supplementary aids and services" is not typically used by TEAMs in Massachusetts. If that is the case, school districts should deliberately introduce this term to the school community and members of the TEAM. TEAM members must consider first how to maintain a student with special needs in the regular classroom and not remove students from the classroom for any special services unless they have determined that such services cannot be provided in the regular classroom through the use of supplementary aids or services. Supplementary aids and services may include but are not limited to: supplementary services (such as resource room or itinerant instruction) to be provided in conjunction with regular class placement; curriculum and instructional material adaptations and modifications, such as taped or brailled textbooks, alternative texts, and parallel or small group instruction; modifications to the educational environment, such as preferential seating and the use of study carrels; and modifications to the service delivery system, such as the use of an additional instructor or peer tutors.
Additionally, advances in assistive technology have resulted in requests for portable computers, talking computers, telecommunication devices (TDDs) and other technology that TEAMs may not have considered. The TEAM must explore what supplementary aids, or services (including assistive technology), will directly relate to the needs of the student and that student's success in the education program. The TEAM must look carefully at the constellation of the student's needs and abilities and determine if an aid such as a portable computer is necessary to the student's success in his/her educational program. The school district is not obligated to provide state of the art technology if the student's needs do not require it or if the student is unable to utilize it. Supplementary aids and services (including assistive technology) that are provided as a part of a student's special education program must be described in the IEP in the student profile section. If modifications of the regular education program are necessary to ensure the student's participation in that program, those modifications must also be described in the student's IEP.
This applies to any regular education program in which the student may participate, including physical education, art, music, and vocational education. A detailed advisory on assistive technology will be provided by the Department in the near future.
The Department recommends that schools identify a range of pre-referral activities, teaching strategies and curriculum modifications which can be utilized for any student who is having difficulty in the classroom. Many "pre-referral" activities utilize supplementary aids and services and early use of such supports may make referral for special education services unnecessary.
The Department further recommends providing specific training for all TEAM chairpersons on the consideration and use of supplementary aids and services for students with special needs, including how such supports may be used to enable the student to receive special education services in less restrictive environments.
State: [[paragraph]]322.22 of the Chapter 766 Regulations concerns the designation of the student's prototype and states in part that "the decision regarding prototype and program shall be based on the IEP, including the types of related services which are to be provided...the settings in which those services are to be provided, the types of service providers and the location..."
In Massachusetts the TEAM meeting is used as the single vehicle to (1) discuss evaluation results, (2) write the IEP, and (3) determine the placement. The Department believes that with careful planning, the TEAM can attend to each of these three elements and appropriately determine placement based on the written IEP. (See also Section 5 on Developing the IEP.)
The Department recommends that school districts provide specific training for all TEAM chairpersons on the requirements and the necessary sequence of events.
State: [[paragraph]]322.7 of the Chapter 766 Regulations regarding the development of the IEP states that the IEP should include "a description of the child's participation in the regular education program including academic and non-academic areas; physical education, adapted as necessary; and extra-curricular activities." In [[paragraph]]502.13 districts are reminded of their obligation to "ensure that children in need of special education have an equal opportunity to participate in and, when appropriate, receive credit for the educational, non-academic, extracurricular, and ancillary programs, services, and activities with children in the regular education program."
School policies regarding participation in non-academic and extracurricular services and activities must be equitable and must ensure that if a student without disabilities would be welcome to participate, then a student with disabilities must also be welcome to participate.
The Department recommends that school districts provide specific training for all TEAM chairpersons on the requirements and the necessary sequence of events.
Additionally, the Department recommends that schools pay particular attention to ensuring that students who are in more restrictive settings, such as separate classrooms or out-of-district Chapter 766 approved placements, are offered access and opportunities to participate in those elements of the regular education program or nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities in which they are able and willing to participate. Placement in these more separate settings must not create barriers to integration and participation.
State: [[paragraph]]321.2 of the Chapter 766 Regulations states: "At the TEAM meeting, the TEAM shall review the evaluative data and determine whether the child requires special education." [[paragraph]] 314.0 describes the composition of the TEAM and states that if it is determined that the student requires special education, the TEAM shall write an IEP at the meeting. Paragraphs 322.0-322.22(h) outline the contents of the IEP.
In Massachusetts, school districts generally utilize a single TEAM meeting to (1) review evaluation information, (2) develop the IEP, and (3) make a placement determination. Federal and state regulations allow more than one meeting; however Chapter 766 regulations require that all three activities take place within a 45 day time period.
Annual reviews or three-year reevaluations may not require as much time to review evaluation information, since required student progress reports should serve to keep the TEAM, including the parent, aware of the student's program and progress.
Federal and state regulations permit TEAM participants to draft goals and objectives prior to the TEAM meeting. A draft IEP may be prepared and brought to the TEAM meeting as long as TEAM participants, including the parent, have a genuine opportunity to discuss all aspects of the IEP and to participate in the determination of what will be included in the final IEP. A draft IEP may be helpful to all participants in generating discussion and may assist the TEAM in completing all activities in a single session of reasonable length.
The Department recommends that school districts provide training to TEAM chairpersons and evaluation personnel in how to facilitate the development of the IEP at the TEAM meeting with input from all required participants, including parent(s), as well as how to write IEPs which include all required components, including useful goals and objectives. Schools utilizing the new IEP format may find that it will assist in this process.
State: In [[paragraph]][[paragraph]]132.0, 322.21, 335.4 of the Chapter 766 Regulations, transition services are defined, IEP requirements are described, and procedures to be followed in the event that a participating agency fails to provide the agreed-upon services are outlined.
At the IEP meeting, the student's need for transition services must be discussed by all required participants, including the student and appropriate agency representative(s). If the TEAM determines that transition services in the areas listed above are necessary, such services MUST be included as part of the student's IEP. If the TEAM determines that the student does not require transition services, a statement that documents that decision and states the reasons for that decision must be part of the IEP. The Statement of Needed Transition Services provided as part of the new IEP form contains all of the required information and will assist the TEAM to ensure that its determination regarding transition services is appropriate to the student's needs.
The Department recommends that school districts provide training for all TEAM chairpersons regarding the requirements, timelines, and best practices in the area of transition for ELIGIBLE students. The Department specifically recommends the training and information provided by the Massachusetts Transition Initiative (MTI).
34 C.F.R. [[section]]300.505(a)(2) requires that the content of the notice include a description of the action proposed or refused by the agency, an explanation of why the agency proposes or refuses to take the action, and a description of any options the agency considered but did not choose and the reasons why those options were rejected.
34 C.F.R. [[section]][[section]]500.505(a)(3) and (a)(4) require further that the notice include a description of each evaluation procedure, test, record, or report used as a basis for the proposal or refusal and a description of any other factors which are relevant to the proposal or refusal.
State: [[paragraph]]317 of the Chapter 766 Regulations outlines in detail the times and occasions when notice is required, the contents of the notice, and the various statements and explanations which are necessary to include in the notice.
These are the most common and frequent occasions on which written notice will be required, but this list is not all inclusive. School districts must also ensure that when notice is sent, it meets content requirements.
The Department recommends that districts utilize the sample notice letters provided by the Department as templates to ensure that all of the required information is included when written notice is provided. Of particular interest is the requirement to describe the placement options that the school district considered and why these options were accepted or rejected, including why education in the regular education environment with the use of supplementary aids and services was rejected. (See also Section 2 on Supplementary Aids and Services and Section 5 on Developing the IEP.) The sample letters enable the school district to provide individualized information about the facts relevant to the individual student, and document the action proposed or refused. School districts must include all of the appropriate information and detail required by the law.
34 C.F.R. [[section]][[section]]300.660-300.662. Further, the state must demonstrate that parents and other interested parties are informed about the complaint management procedures, that complaints are resolved within 60 days, and that a written decision addressing each allegation and the basis of the Department's determinations is issued to the complainant.
State: Chapter 766 Regulation [[paragraph]]215.0 describes the Complaint Management System, now known as the Problem Resolution System, and the availability of written guidelines and procedures.
The Department recommends that all school districts (1) develop formal local problem resolution procedures consistent with state and federal regulations and share them with the community, and (2) provide training to staff and parents on the problem resolution procedures that are available at the state and local levels. Local Special Needs Parent Advisory Councils could assist districts in training and information dissemination efforts.
State: [[paragraph]]127 of the Chapter 766 Regulations defines related services as transportation and such developmental, corrective, and other supportive services as are required to assist a student with special education needs to benefit from special education. [[paragraph]]503 echoes these words and adds a more complete list of services which are considered related services. This paragraph also states that for each student found to require related services, the school committee must arrange for the provision of such services.
The Department is aware that in some areas of the Commonwealth there is a lack of qualified individuals to provide related services. The school district is not relieved of its obligation to offer or provide the service because of a lack of qualified individuals. If the district has made all reasonable efforts to obtain related service providers without success, the district must reconvene the TEAM to examine if there are alternative ways to meet the goals identified in the IEP.
The Department recommends that districts employ more than a single strategy in seeking to obtain a related service provider. Strategies that have been successful in the past have included (a) multiple advertisements in statewide or local newspapers, (b) agreements with area colleges or universities to advertise or utilize placement offices, (c) contracted services with a professional organization to provide such services, (d) agreements with neighboring school districts to share services, and (e) soliciting assistance on a case-by-case basis from professionals in the system, the community, and/or the parents in helping to identify an appropriate service provider.
Districts may at any time seek information and assistance from the Department of Education. In order to compile a selection of strategic approaches to this recurring problem, the Department will maintain a log of actions it has recommended to communities experiencing difficulty in fulfilling this requirement .
Students who are blind or visually impaired, or who are experiencing progressive vision loss to the point where they can no longer productively or effectively use print, must be assessed for and instructed in a meaningful alternative medium in order to have equal access to education and literacy within the meaning of Chapter 766 and the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Braille is the primary accepted alternative medium to print. Hence, these students, on the premise of equal rights, are eligible to receive braille instruction from qualified teachers of the blind and visually impaired. This recognition of equity in literacy in support of braille instruction holds true unless the student has other disabilities that prevent the student from learning and using braille, or if the student can reasonably be expected to maintain sufficient vision over his or her lifetime to be able to read either print or magnified print at a level comparable to his or her non-visually impaired peers.
The Department recommends that TEAMs genuinely consider the appropriateness of braille, unless the TEAM documents that the student is unable to learn braille, or is currently able and will predictably, over the term of his or her life, be able to read print in a manner comparable to his or her non-visually impaired peers.
1. Deaf and severely hard of hearing students are often delayed in the acquisition of a first language for thinking and socializing, due to inadequate assessment of language needs and stage of language development both in English and American Sign Language (ASL).
2. Placement in educational situations without the language capacity to understand the educational process further jeopardizes the language development of deaf or severely hard of hearing students. Further, if a student's language development is limited, provision of an "interpreter" may not be an effective educational response.
3. For students who are deaf or severely hard of hearing, the consideration of regular public school programs as the "least restrictive environment" may be incorrect and prejudicial to that student's capacity for educational progress. A decision regarding the "least restrictive" educational environment must take into account the communication and language factors as well as the other needs of the student at the time of the development of the IEP.
The Department recommends that school districts meet with representatives of specialized programs for the deaf (providing services in both oral language and ASL) to explore the use of itinerant or consultation services to public school personnel when the TEAM has determined that placement in a public school program is appropriate.
Further, the Department recommends that school districts seek to develop collaborative regional programs for the education of deaf and hard of hearing students, including direct education, provision of services by itinerant teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing (both ASL and oral), pooling of educational interpreters, services to monitor assistive listening systems and hearing aids, specialized assessment services, sign language classes, and so on.
Finally, the Department recommends providing training to key staff members in the unique educational needs of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. National "Educational Guidelines for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students" have been developed. They are largely based on Massachusetts Guidelines developed in 1989. The Department has arranged to have a copy of the National Guidelines sent to each school district's Special Education Administrator. Additional copies, at a cost of $10 each, may be ordered from the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) at the following address:
News ||
Education Reform ||
About the D.O.E. ||
Educational Technology||
Search our Site
Administrators Area ||
Teachers Area ||
Students Area ||
Parents & Community Area