Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Students with disabilities do not threaten effective school
Transcript of Students with disabilities do not threaten effective school
=Free Appropriate Public Education
Students with disabilities do not threaten effective school discipline.
Punitive approaches threaten effective school discipline,
students with disabilities
Punitive approaches to discipline have proven unsuccessful (Canter, et. al) "Current research and legislation offer alternative "best practice" strategies that support the safe education of
students. Such effective discipline practices ensure the safety and dignity of students and staff, preserve the integrity of the learning environment, and address the causes of a student's misbehavior in order to improve positive behavior skills and long-term outcomes." (Canter and Wright, 2002)
IDEA 1997 addressed and brought together "all of the rules that apply to students with disabilities faced with disciplinary actions." (Skiba, 2002)
Balance is needed between the rights of students with disabilities and school safety and authority.
IDEA was never meant to exclude students with disabilities from being accountable for negative behavior. It is a safeguard for students with disabilities from being denied a Free and Appropriate Public Education, a right every student in America possesses.
IDEA 1997 attempted to strike "a careful balance between LEA's (local education agency) duty to ensure that school environments are safe and conducive to learning for all children including children with disabilities, and LEA's continuing obligation to ensure that children with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (Senate report 105-17, 1997) (Skiba, 2000)
Schools suggests that the district's right to suspend or expel students have been taken away. Eliminating their right to provide fair, across the board, zero tolerance discipline, thus reducing effective school discipline.
Four basic themes run throughout the statute concerning discipline:
1. All children, including children with disabilities, deserve safe, well-disciplined schools and orderly learning environments;
2. Teachers and school administrators should have the tools they need to assist them in preventing misconduct and discipline problems and to address these problems, if they arise;
3. There must be a balanced approach to the issue of discipline of children with disabilities that reflects the need for orderly and safe schools and the need to protect the right of children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE); and
4. Appropriately developed IEPs with well developed behavior intervention strategies decrease school discipline problems.
(Heumann and Hehir, 1997)
"There is nothing in IDEA that restricts schools from disciplining children with disabilities." (Dwyer, 1997)
Google Images, 2014
IDEA 2004, 2005
Massachusetts Department of Education, 2007
IDEA 2004 maintained and strengthened the fundamental discipline provisions of IDEA 1997.
School administers need to set up and follow a unified system of school discipline. This system needs to focus on prevention and improving the school climate, not on punishment and exclusion. Understanding students with disabilities and providing positive behavioral supports for students will undoubtedly provide a safer, healthier, more positive learning environment for all students.
FAPE= Free and Appropriate Public Education......
FAPE does not threaten school discipline if executed effectively.