Special Education Needs for Children - Article Example

Special Education Needs for Children – Individual Education Plan All children have the right to good education and opportunity to fulfill their dream. Teachers are expected to teach children with special educational needs (SEN) and all schools should play their part in education children from their local community irrespective of their background or ability (DfES, 2004). SEN was introduced to meet the needs of children who were considered to be “uneducable”,”maladjusted” or “educationally sub-normal” (Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Education and Skills Committee, 2006). As part of SEN, Individual Education Plan (IEP) was introduced to provide special services to children with delayed skills or other physical and mental disabilities. The strategy of IEP is to ensure early intervention of policies for children facing difficulties in learning, remove barriers to learning, raise the expectations and achievement of children by developing teachers’ skills and delivering improvements in partnership by involving parents and children in improving the targets (DfES, 2004) .Individual Education Program (IEP) is a strategy to improve the learning capabilities of children through specific program or class, specific services and other educated components such as curricula and teaching methods (Siegel 2009). There has extensive research into the effectiveness of IEP by various institutions and academicians and its impact of the children. The present paper critically reviews the work of Janet Goepel’s “Constructing the Individual Education Plan: Confusion or Collaboration?” and Hanne Pawley and Geoff Tennant’s “Student Perceptions of their IEP Targets”. Theme The Special Education Needs Code of Practice (2001) is the main focus in both the articles. Pawley and Tennant (2008) focus on one key element of IEPs which is to study into the extent to which students themselves contribute to and understand their own IEP targets whereas Goepel (2009) focuses on the partnership between teacher, parent and student and investigates to what extent there is a common agreement between the teacher, parent and child with regard to the nature of child’s need. The authors intended to study the effectiveness of IEP in the school, implementation process and its awareness among children who were seeking the benefits of special education needs. The role of parents and teachers in the IEP is also studied so as to analyze the involvement parent in formulating IEP annually and to what extent the school authorities implemented the views presented by children in the IEP. Thus it is clarified that both the authors didn’t have any vested interest in conducting the study. Goepel (2009) and Pawley and Tennant (2008) have researched a common topic i.e. IEP and student participation. Both the articles are similar in research questions as they aim to investigate into the awareness of IEP by children, importance of their decision regarding IEP in annual IEP formulation and the problems they face while reviewing IEP. Methodology Research is a way of thinking, examining critically the various aspects of day to day professional works, understanding and formulating guiding principles that govern a particular procedure, developing and testing new theories. Research is being undertaken within a framework of a set of philosophies; uses procedures, methods and techniques that have been tested for their validity and reliability and provide answers to questions which is unbiased (Kumar, 2008). Goepel (2009) has adopted quantitative research methodology so as to investigate into the extent of common agreement between the teacher, parent and children and to what extent the children views and opinion were heeded while formulating the annual IEP targets. The author selected eight pupils who were found to be eligible to participate in the fieldwork but only four of them completed all the data collection permission and processes requested. A structured questionnaire to gain understanding of the child’s need was devised and distributed to teachers, parents and pupils with a parallel set of questions. The data pertaining to questionnaire were noted by author himself aided by teacher and were recorded. However it is not clear why the author did not choose to look into the previous IEP’s of the schools and compare it with the present plan so as to analyze the seriousness of school authorities and teachers in implementing IEP for children requiring special needs. The sample size is limited to only four children because the study required the children to be aware of the IEP so that the objective of study is achieved. Pawley and Tennant (2008) interviewed 19 students of Year 8 using quantitative research method as to analyze the level of awareness of IEP among student and how do they contribute to IEP. The author carried out fieldwork in three different schools and selected students from Year 8 in order to limit age variability and included those with general learning difficulties and with specific learning difficulties. The students were interviewed using semi structured interview schedule. Only 19 students, 14 boys and 5 girls, were finally selected for the study because it was impossible to attain permission from parents of all the students who met the criteria. Apart from students, SEN Coordinators of three schools were also interviewed according to semi structured schedule. Though the sample size is good the study is limited to awareness level of IEP among students and their involvement in formulation in annual IEP but does not focuses on parental involvement in IEP preparation so that the concerns of parent can be addressed while setting IEP targets to students. Critical analysis of both articles reveals that both the authors have used quantitative methodology so as to find the extent to which the children are aware of IEP by using semi structured interview schedule. Findings Critical analysis of study conducted by Goepel (2009) reveals that there is strong difference between the opinion of children, teachers and parents. There is no common agreement by all the stakeholders that were involved during the study. Though there were instances where the opinions of children matched with teachers and parents but there were differences of perception while confusion and misunderstanding were evident. All the four students interviewed during his study possessed good awareness of IEP and raised issues about IEP but were willing to work in allegiance with the strategies set by the school authorities. This gives a clear indication that the common agreement between all the stakeholders is not evident and students have to work according to the targets set by the teachers in IEP. The data presented by the author seems legitimate as it presents certain positive as well negative aspects of the partnerships in IEP which further needs improvement and amendment. The study by Pauley and Tennant (2008) reveals that all the 19 children interviewed had different perspective of what an IEP was and only two students were able to communicate an understanding of an IEP and their IEP targets. It was noted by author that students with the strongest awareness attended one particular school that did not stand out in the student sample in terms of communication, recall or cognitive ability. During the interview of SEN Coordinators, it was revealed that they had difficulties in managing IEP process particularly in communicating with subject teachers in large schools, with staff differing in attitude and relevant training. A critical analysis of the article proves a point that if a student is to have an IEP then a considerable amount of time and effort needs to be expended towards student. The author mentions about the evidence of fraud in schools that prepare IEP only before the inspection for the benefit of inspectors that a ‘practical basis for individualized planning’. Both the articles stress on the importance of using IEP extensively in schools and teachers should be trained in providing special educational needs to children with learning difficulties and disabilities. The authors, though have different samples and settings, stressed the need for creating awareness of IEP among children and involving them in IEP review so as to present their practical problems. Implications for Practice Critical review of the articles reveals the Individual Education Program (IEP) is essential for the development of children with learning difficulties and other disabilities. The studies carried out by both the authors stress the need to create awareness among students so that they are active participants in IEP review meeting involving teachers and parents. The study also reveals that though some schools involve students in IEP review meeting, their opinions and views pertaining to their practical problems are not heeded and hence the children have to work on the strategies set by the school. It is necessary for the teachers and parents to understand the importance of IEP and have common agreement about the IEP so that children get what they want, instead of setting strategies. In view of the above, A study in the direction of evaluation and assessment of IEP in schools will also be helpful to analyze the effectiveness of IEP among children. Further studies may be carried out to study the teachers perceptions and training provided by school authorities to its teachers about the importance of IEP so as to recommend certain strategies that will recognize the importance of IEP as opposed to the findings by Pawley and Tennant where schools did not implemented IEP and prepared only for the sake of inspectors. References 1. DfES (2004) Removing Barriers to Achievement: The Governments Strategy for SEN, DfES Publications, UK 2. Goepel J (2009) Constructing the Individual Education Plan: Confusion or Collaboration?, Individual Education Plan, Blackwell Publishing, UK 3. Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Education and Skills Committee (2006) Special educational needs, Volume 1, The Stationery Office, UK 4. Hanne Pawley and Geoff Tennant (2008) Student Perceptions of their IEP Targets, Support for Learning · Volume 23 · Number 4, Blackwell Publishing, UK 5. Siegel M.L, (2009) The Complete IEP Guide: How to Advocate for Your Special Ed Child, Ed. 6th, Nolo, Consolidated Printers, Inc,USA Read More