Why Is This Cake On Fire? Inviting Students Into the IEP Process

Abstract

Imagine being a small child and hearing your parents talk about your birthday party. You hear the excitement in their voices as they talk and plan, starting with a theme for the party, deciding whom they will invite, and then figuring out who will do each job. As the time draws closer, you hear more and more conversations about your birthday party, and so you know it is coming soon. And then your birthday comes and goes, but no one ever invites you to your party. Maybe they just forgot to invite me. you think. Several years later . . .

Full text

Curriculum Modifications and Accommodations
Why
Is
This
Cake
on
Fire?
Inviting Students
Into
the
IEP Process
Jamie L. Van Dycke
James E. Martin
David L. Lovett
Ihe Blrfhday Party
Imagine being
a
small child
and
hearing
your parents talk about your birthday
party.
You
hear
the
excitement
in
their
voices
as
they talk
and
plan, starting
with
a
theme
for the
party, deciding
whom they will invite,
and
then figuring
out
who
will
do
each
job. As the
time
draws closer,
you
hear more
and
more
conversations about your birthday
party,
and so you
know
it is
coming
soon.
And
then your birthday comes
and goes,
but no one
ever invites
you to
your party. Maybe they just forgot
to
invite
me. you
think.
The Next Year
. . .
The next year,
you
again hear your
par-
ents discuss your birthday party. Once
again,
you
hear
the
excitement
in
their
voices
as
they talk
and
plan, choose
a
new theme
for the
party, decide whom
they will invite,
and
then finally,
appoint someone
to be in
charge
of
each
job.
Again,
as
time draws closer,
you
hear more
and
more conversations
about your birthday party
and so you
know
it is
coming soon.
And
again your
birthday comes
and
goes,
but no one
ever invites
you to
your party.
It
must
not
be
important
for me to be
there,
you
think.
The Follo^ng Year
, . .
The following year,
you
once again hear
your parents talk about your birthday
party. You barely notice
tbe
excited tone
in their voices
as
tbey decide
on
anoth-
er
new
theme, make
the
invitation list,
and divide
the
jobs.
As the
time draws
closer,
you
barely listen
to the
increased
conversations about your party. Again
your birthday comes
and
goes,
but no
one ever invites
you. Now you
think
that birthday parties
are not
important
at
all.
Several Years Later
. . ,
Several years later, when
you
become
a
teenager,
you
barely catch
a
snippet
of a
conversation about your birthday party.
But since
you
have never been invited
to your parties,
you
know that your
presence there
is not
important.
You
believe that birthday parties
are not
important
at all, so you do not pay any
attention
to the
birthday plans.
But this time,
you
receive
an
invita-
tion
to
your party!
You are
surprised,
confused,
and
even scared.
You ask
your parents
why you
received
an
invi-
tation this year. They
say.
Well,
you are a
teenager
now,
and
you are old
enough
to
help
with everything that
a
birthday
party involves. Each year,
we
start
with
a
theme
for
your party
and
decide
the
best ways
to
represent
that theme. Then
we
make
the
invitation list
and
decide
who
will
do
the
different jobs.
Now
that
you
are a
teenager,
we
thought
that
you
would like
to
become
involved!
42 •
COUNCIL
FOR
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

But
you
respond
by
saying,
Why would
I
want
to
become
involved now?
If
these birthday
parties were supposed
to be my
birthday parties,
why
wasn't
/
invited
all
along?
Why
didn't
I
have
a
chance
to
select themes
that interest me? Why didn't
I get
to help decide whom
to
invite?
And
why
didn't
I get to
help
choose
who
would
do the
differ-
ent jobs?
"We thought that
you
were
not old
enough
to
help."
"Now
I am so old
that
I do not
know
how
to
help with
any of it; you
have
been doing
it for me for all
these years.
Just keep
on
doing
it
without
me."
Now
. . .
Imagine this scenario again, only this
time,
insert individualized education
program
(IEP)
meetings
in
place
of
birthday parties.
The IEP Meeting
Students with disabilities hear their
teachers
and
parents talk about their
IEP meetings, they hear about goals,
and they hear about what they
are
doing wrong and the problems that they
are having. They hear about plans
and
services
and
who will work
on
each job.
They hear about who will attend the IEP
meetitig.
But
students rarely receive
invitations
to
attend when they first
begin
to
hear about these meetings.
At
first, students may believe that someone
just forgot
to
invite them.
In the
years
that follow, when they still
do not
receive invitations, students
may
think
that attending their own IEP meetings
is
not important since
no one
shares
any
information about
the
meeting. They
may decide that
an IEP
meeting
is an
opportunity
for
adults
to
talk negatively
about
all the
problems tbat students
are
having
iti
school
and
divide
up the
nec-
essary jobs.
The First Invitation
By
the
time tbat students become
teenagers, they
may
have decided that
IEP meetings
are not
important
at all
since
no one has
invited them
or
includ-
ed them
in the
planning phase.
In
fact.
some students may
be
ashamed
for
any-
one
to
know that they have
an IEP.
When students reach middle school
or
high school and finally receive their first
invitation
to
attend
an
IEP meetitig, they
may
not be
interested
at
all—and they
make statemetits similar
to
those
in the
birthday party example:
"Now I am so
old that
I do not
ktiow
how to
help with
any
of
it;
you
have beeti doing
it for me
for
all
these years. Just keep
on
doing
it
without
me."
Questions Wfo Should Ask
As educators, parents,
and
service
providers,
we
should
be
asking
the fol-
lowing questions:
• Do we encourage students
to
become
involved
in
their IEP meetings?
• Does this involvement begin
at an
early age?
• Do we encourage students
to
become
involved
in
designing
the
"themes"
of their IEPs?
•
Do we
allow students
to
help decide
whom
to
invite
to
their
lEP
meet-
ings?
•
Do we
give students opportunities
to
be responsible
for the
goals
in
their
IEPs?
•
Do
students know that
the
IEP meet-
ings
are for
them
and
that
the
ititent
of
the IEP
process
is to
design
a
plan—a blueprint—that will help
them
be
successful
in
school
and in
hfe?
Do students know that the
intent
of
the IEP process
is
to
design
a
pian—«
hiueprint^hat wiii heip
them he successfui
in
schooi and
in
iife?
Behaviors
We
Shouid Expect
The
1997
Amendments
to the
Indi-
viduals with Disabilities Education
Act
[IDEA) recognized students
as
impor-
tant members
of the IEP
team (Martin,
Huber Marshall,
&
Sale, 2004; Storms,
O'Leary,
&
Williams, 2000; Test
et al,
2004).
The
2004 IDEA amendments
continue
to
emphasize
the
importance
of transition planning
and
require that
the
IEP
team develop measurable post-
secondary goals
in the
IEP
on the
basis
of
the
student's assessed needs,
strengths, preferences,
and
interests
(Council
for
Exceptional Children,
2004).
The implication
is
that educators
need
to
invite students
not
only
to be a
part
of the
IEP meeting
but
also
to be a
part
of
the IEP process,
so
tbat they
can
learn about
and
communicate their
needs,
preferences,
and
interests.
Students should
be
involved with
the
IEP planning process
and
should
• Have
an
informative role
in
develop-
ing
and
writing their educational
performance description (the Present
Levels
of
Educational Performance,
or PLEP).
•
Aid in
developing measurable post-
secondary goals
in
their IEPs.
• Help identify
the
accommodations,
modifications,
and
supports that
they need.
• Be responsible
in the
achievement
of
coordinated transition activities,
postschool linkages,
and
post-
secondary goals (Mason, Field,
&
Sawilowsky, 2004; Mason, McGahee-
Kovac, Johnson,
&
Stillermati, 2002).
Ara
We
Inviring Students
to
Speak
or
Just
to
Attend?
Expecting students
to
exercise active
roles
in the IEP
process means doing
much more than just invititig them
to
attend
the
meetings.
We
must encour-
age tbem
to
participate actively
in the
IEP conversations.
In
Year 1
of a
3-year
research study cotiducted
by
Martin,
et
al.
(2006), researchers observed
109
middle
and
high school IEP meetings
to
determine who talked
in
typical teacher-
directed
IEP
meetings.
In
those meet-
ings,
students only talked during 3%
of
the IEP meeting time. Special educators
spoke
51
%
of
the time, family members
spoke
15% of the
time, general educa-
tors
and
administrators each spoke
9%,
support personnel spoke
6%, and mul-
tiple conversations occurred during
5%
of the meeting time. Finally, during
2%
TEACHING
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
•
JAN/FEB
2006 • 43

Figure
1.
Pvrcantag*
of
Intervals That IEP Team Members Talked
During Observed IEP Meetings
Multiple Conv
5%
Student
No
Conversations
2%
Family
15%
Z'fk SPED Teachers
51%
Figure
2. Tbe
SeH-Dlrected
IEP Leadership Steps
1.
Introduce self
2.
Introduce
IEP
team
members
3.
State purpose
of
meeting
4.
Review past goals
and
progress
5.
Ask for
feedback
6.
Ask
questions
if did not
understand
7.
Deal with differences
in
opinion
8. State needed support
9.
Express interests
10.
Express skills
and
limits
11.
Express options
and
goals
12.
Close meeting
by
thanking
everyone
of
the
time
at
these ohserved
IEP
meet-
ings,
no
conversation occurred
at
all,
as
Figure
1
indicates.
The
student contri-
bution category therefore exceeded
only
the
category
in
which
no
one was
talking.
We must encourage them
to participate actively in
the lEP conversations.
How
Do W»
Bring
Into
the
IEP Conversations?
Shident IEP Leadership Steps
Martin
et al.
(2006) used
the 12 IEP
leadership steps (Martin, Huber
Mar-
shall, Maxson,
&
Jerman,
1997)
shown
in Figure
2 to
observe
how
students
became involved
in
their lEPs. During
the
109
teacher-directed
IEP
meetings,
students expressed interests
in
49.4%
of
the meetings, expressed options
and
goals
in
27.1%
of the
meetings,
and
expressed skills
and
limits
in 20% of
the meetings.
The
researchers never
observed students stating
the
purpose
of
the
meeting, asking
for
feedback,
or
closing
the
meeting
by
thanking every-
one.
Students introduced themselves
or
other
IEP
team members, reviewed past
goals
and
progress, asked questions
when they
did not
understand, dealt
with differences
in
opinion,
or
stated
needed support
at 6% or
less
of the
meetings.
In Year
2
of
the
study [Martin,
et ai.,
in press), participating teachers
ran-
domly selected students
for
IEP
instruc-
tion groups. That year,
the
researchers
ohserved
130 IEP
meetings:
In 65 of
those meetings,
the
students
had
received
IEP
leadership instruction;
and
in
the
other
65
meetings,
the
students
had
not.
In the
meetings observed after
students
had
received
IEP
leadership
instruction,
the
students' contribution
increased across
all 12 lEP
leadership
steps, with
the
largest increases occur-
ring
for
introducing self
and
team
mem-
bers,
stating
the
purpose
of
the
meeting,
reviewing past goals
and
progress,
and
expressing options
and
goals. Table
1
shows
the 12
IEP
leadership steps that
students exhibited
in
Years
1 and 2 of
the Martin
et
al. (in
pressj study.
In the
Year
2
IEP
meetings that occurred after
educators
had
taught students
how to
become involved, student participation
aiso increased
to 12% of the
meeting
time—a much more encouraging
amount than
the
student contribution
of
3%
that occurred
in the
Year 1 teacher-
directed meetings
(see
box, "What Does
Research Reveal About Student Involve-
ment
in the
IEP
Process?").
Steps
for
Educators
Educators should incorporate student
self-directed
IEP
instruction into
the stu-
dent's curriculum according
to the
needs
of the
student
and the
structure
of
the
school
day.
Teachers
in the
Martin
et
al.
tin
press) study taught
the
12 self-directed
IEP
lessons
in a
variety
of ways. Teaching each lesson took
approximately
45
minutes. Students
received instruction over
a
6-day period
(two lessons
per
day),
an
11-day period
(one
or
two lessons
per
day),
or
in
1
day
at
a
student leadership retreat. Teachers
infused
the
self-directed
IEP
instruction
into before-school
or
after-school
stu-
dent meetings, resource
or
study peri-
ods,
and
into
the
English, social studies,
or social skills curriculum
[see box,
"What
Do
Educators
Say
After They
Teach Students
to
Self-Direct Their
IEPs?").
44 •
COUNCIL
FOR
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Tnblft
1.
Sfvdent IEP Leadership Step* Exhibited In Sfudy
IEP Leadership Steps
Introduce self
Introduce IEP team members
State purpose
of
meeting
Review past goals and progress
Ask for feedback
Ask questions
if
did not understand
Deal with differences
in
opinion
State needed support
Express interests
Express skills and limits
Express options and goals
Close meeting by thanking everyone
% of Students
Who Exhibited Steps
in Year
1
With No IEP
Leadership Instruction
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49
20
27
0
Years
1
and
2
% of Students
Who Exhibited Steps
in Year 2 With No IEP
Leadership Instruction
0
0
0
1
0
18
15
8
62
9
24
0
% of Students
Who Exhibited Steps
in Year 2 With IEP
Leadership Instruction
70
77
70
53
22
35
17
25
n
43
53
14
Steps for Parent5
Parents can take several steps
to
help
their child become more than just
an
attendee at the IEP meeting. The parent
needs to take many of these steps early
in the child's life, such as learning early,
along with the child, about his
or
her
disability; learning how to talk comfort-
ably about challenges
in
terms that the
child can easily understand; and learn-
ing, along with
the
child, about
the
What Does Research Reveal About Student Involvement
in the IEP Process?
During the past 10 years, self-determination has become such
a
central topic in
special education literature that "promoting self-determination (SD) or teaching
students to take control of their life, is becoming a hallmark of providing full and
complete special education services" [Karvonen, Test, Wood, Browder,
&
Algozzine, 2004, p. 23). Research indicates that this hallmark is rarely achieved.
Agran, Snow, and Swaner (1999) found that although 75% of middle and high
school teachers rated SD skills
as a
high priority, 55% failed
to
include goals
related to SD skills in any of their students' IEPs. Wehmeyer, Agran, and Hughes
(2000) found that only 22% of secondary teachers reported writing SD goals for
all their students. Mason,
et
al. [2002) found that students and teachers highly
value student involvement in the IEP planning process, but that study identified
several logistical challenges that educators must resolve before they can imple-
ment
SD
practices: "Chief among these is finding the time necessary for adequate
student preparation. With the trend away from pull-out resource rooms toward
inclusion in the general classrooms, teachers are finding
it
difficult to schedule
time
to
prepare students
for
IEP meetings"
(p.
188). The question quickly
becomes,
"If
teachers cannot find time
to
prepare students
to
self-direct their
IEPs,
how are they going to prepare students to self-direct their lives?"
child's strengths, preferences, gifts, and
needs (Bateman, Bright,
&
Boldin,
2003).
Additionally, parents need to fre-
quently remind their child of the impor-
tance
of
his
or
her strengths and gifts
and how they contribute to the family,
the classroom,
and the IEP
process.
Beginning with
Ihe
first IEP meeting,
parents should expect their child
to
become an IEP team member, and they
should talk to the child ahout his or her
role in the IEP meeting (see box, "How
Do Parents Respond
to
Student
Involvement in IEP Meetings?"). Finally,
parents need
to
frequently review
progress toward
IEP
goals with their
child (Bateman et al.,
2003;
Schoellar
&
Emanuel, 2003).
To many students, the IEP
process and meeting may
appear os alien and
avrkward as an annual
birthday party that they do
not help plan or attend.
TEACHING
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
•
JAN/FEB
2006 • 45

Do Educators Say Aftar They Teach Students
to Self-Direct Their IEPs?
Teachers involved in the Martin et al. [in press) study made the following
comments after teaching the self-directed IEP to their students:
• A teacher who had taught the self-directed IEP lessons said—
The students have taken much more interest in this than I thought they
would.
I think I just figured that since I knew all about IEPs and have
talked about having to do IEP meetings so much, that my students would
just somehow figure out what they were. I didn't think about actually
teaching them about IEPs. Why would I have thought ihat they would
leam this on their own?
• A teacher who had taught the first three lessons of the self-directed IEP
said—
The students are embarrassed and giggly in class about the role-playing.
But it's a great way to teach them about social skills, like how to introduce
someone by looking at them, and holding your head up, and making eye
contact. They don't know it yet, but we're going to be role-playing the
entire IEP in the counselor's office when we get further along with the les-
sons. 1 want them to practice in the environment where they're actually
going to be doing this.
• A teacher who had conducted several student-directed IEP meetings said—
This is a great way for students to leam to advocate for themselves, espe-
cially for the ones who have parents that can't or don't know how to advo-
cate for them.
• A teacher who had taught students to self-direct their IEP meetings said—
/ agreed to take part in this study last year, but I wasn't sure at all about
teaching my students about their
!EPs.
This year I'm totally into it. My stu-
dents need to leam these skills. ! see now that the IEP is a workable way
to teach them about advocacy—and they understand more why they are
in special education.
A DKforent Wkiy
To many students, the IEP process and
meeting may appear as alien and awk-
ward as an annual birthday party that
they do not help plan and do not attend.
The IEP process does not have to be that
way. IDEA 2004 has continued to
emphasize secondary transition plan-
ning that focuses on students' needs,
preferences, and interests. The implica-
tion is twofold:
• Students need to be involved in the
IEP process and their IEP meetings
as soon as transition topics surface.
• Students need to learn about their
IEPs and what to do at their IEP
meetings well before they enter their
secondary school years.
These implications, which are not
new, have helped inspire fundamental
changes in secondary special education
and created opportunities for students
to learn crucial self-advocacy and other
self-determination skills during the tran-
sition process [Martin et al., 2006).
Active student involvement at the IEP
meeting is central to this process
[Martin, Greene, & Borland, 2004). It is
now up to professionals and parents to
invite students into the IEP planning
process and to support tbem while they
Then students can blew
out candles of success as
they transition into
adulthood instead of
wondering why a cake is
on fire at a party to which
no one invited them.
How Do Parents Respond to
Student Involvement in IEP
Meetings?
A speech-language pathologist who
attended a student-directed IEP
meeting made the following com-
ment:
/ was watching his mom's
eyes as he was doing his
part of the
IEP
in there, and
I saw a tear It's good to see
students have a more active
role, instead of being so pas-
sive. It took him a little
longer to do his part,
because of his speech delay,
but I don't think anyone
minded that. ! was proud of
him today.
Martin, Huber, Marshall, et al.
[2004) examined tbe perceptions of
IEP meeting participants when stu-
dents attended meetings. The
results of this study indicated tbat
student presence at IEP meetings
adds value and validation to invit-
ing students into the IEP process.
Specifically, the researchers found
that when students attended meet-
ings,
"Parents understood the rea-
son for the meeting better, felt more
comfortable saying what they
thought, understood more of what
was said, and knew better wbat to
do next" [Martin, Huber, Marshall,
etah, pp. 291, 293).
Grigal, Neubert, Moon, and
Graham [2003) surveyed parents,
general educators, and special edu-
cators about their views on
self-
determination and found that par-
ents strongly supported IEP meet-
ing participation and self-determi-
nation instruction. However, Grigal
and colleagues noted tbat IEP meet-
ing participation may have different
meanings to different people and
that some people may equate sim-
ply attending tbe meeting with par-
ticipation. Other studies have con-
firmed this "attendance equals par-
ticipation" notion [Field &
Hoffman, 1994; Martin, Greene, &
Borland, 2004).
46 • COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL GHILDREN

learn
how to be
actively involved
in
their IEP meetings. Then students
can
blow
out
candles
of
success
as
they
transition into adulthood instead
of
wondering why
a
cake
is on
fire
at a
party
to
which no one invited them.
References
Agran,
M.,
Snow,
K.,
& Swaner,
J.
(1999).
Teacher perceptions
of
self-determination:
Benefits, characteristics,
and
strategies.
Education
and
TYaining in Mental
Retard-
ation
and
Developmental Disabilities,
34,
Bateman,
D, R,
Bright,
K., &
Boldin,
A.
(2003J. Parents
as
instructors.
In
D. Wan-
dry
& A.
Pleet (Eds.J,
A
practitioner's
guide
to
involving families
in
secondary
transition
(pp,
71-82). Arlington,
VA:
Council for Exceptional Children.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2004). The
new IDEA: CEC's summary
of
significant
issues. Retrieved December
7,
2004, from
http://www.cec.sped.org/pp/
IDEA_120204.pdf
Field,
S., &
Hoffman,
A.
[1994). Develop-
ment
of a
model
for
self-determination.
Career Development
for
Exceptional Indi-
viduals. 17, 159-169.
Grigal, M., Neubert,
D. A.,
Moon,
M, S,,
&
Graham,
S.
(2003). Self-determination
for
students with disabilities: Views
of par-
ents
and
teachers. Exceptional Children,
70(1],
97-112.
Karvonen,
M.
Test,
D. W.,
Wood,
W. M.,
Browder, D,, & Algozzine, B. (2004). Put-
ting self-determination into practice.
Exceptional Children, 71,
23-41.
Martin,
J.
E., Greene, B. A., & Borland, B.
J.
(2004).
Secondary students' involvement
in their IEP meetings: Administrators' per-
ceptions. Career Development
for
Excep-
tional Children, 27(1). 177-188.
Martin, J. E., Huber Marshall, L., Maxson, L.,
& Jerman,
P.
(1997). Self-directed IEP.
Longmont, GO: Sopris West.
Marlin,
J, E.,
Huber Marshall,
L.,
& Sale,
P.
(2004).
A
3-year
study
of
middle, junior
high,
and
high school
IEP
meetings.
Exceptional Children, 70, 285-297.
Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Greene, B. A.,
Gardner, J. E., Christensen, W. R., Woods,
L.
L., et
al- (2006), Direct observation
of
teacher-directed IEP meetings: Establish-
ing
the
need
for
student
IEP
meeting
instruction. Exceptional Children. 72,
pp.
187-200.
Martin,
J, E.,
Van Dycke,
J. L.,
Ghristensen,
W.
R.,
Greene,
B. A.,
Gardner,
J. E.,
Lovett. D. L. (in press). Increasing student
participation
in
their transition IEP meet-
ings:
Establishing the self-directed IEP
as
an evidence-hased practice. Exceptional
Children.
Mason,
C. Y.,
Field,
S., &
Sawilowsky,
S.
(2004).
Implementation
of
self-determina-
tion activities and student participation
in
IEPs.
Exceptional Children, 70,
441-451.
Mason, G. Y., McGahee-Kovac, M., Johnson,
L., & Stillerman.
S.
(2002). Implementing
student-led IEPs: Student participation
and student and teacher reactions. Career
Development
for
Exceptional Individuals,
25(2),
171-192.
Schoeliar, K., & Emanuel, E. (2003). Parents
as evaluators and decision-makers.
In D.
Wandry & A. Pleet (Eds.),
A
practitioner's
guide
to
involving families
in
secondary
transition
(pp.
41-58). Arlington,
VA:
Council
for
Exceptional Children.
Storms,J., O'Leary, E,,&Wilhams,J. (2000).
The Individuals with Disabilities Educa-
tion Act
of
1997 transition requirements:
A
guide for states, districts, schools, universi-
ties and families. Institute
on
Community
Integration, University
of
Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN.
Test, D.
W,
Mason, G.. Hughes,
C,
Konrad,
M., Neaie,
M., &
Wood,
W. M,
(2004),
Student involvement
in
individualized
education program meetings. Exceptional
Children, 70, 391-412.
Wehmeyer,
M,,
Agran,
M., &
Hughes,
G.
(2000).
A national survey
of
teachers' pro-
motion
of
seif-determination and student-
directed learning. Journal
of
Special
Education. 34{2], 58-68.
Jamie
L.
Van Dycke (CEC OK Federation).
Assistant Professor, Department
of
Curricu-
lum
and
Instruction. Northeastern State
University. Tahlequah, Oklahoma. James
E.
Martin (CEC OK Federation), Endowed Pro-
fessor, Zarrow Center
for
Learning Enrich-
ment:
and
David
L.
Lovett (CEC
OK
Federation), Associate Professor, Department
of Educational Psychology, University
of
Oklahoma. Norman.
Address correspondence
to
Jamie
L. Van
Dycke, Department
of
Curriculum
and
Instruction, Northeastern State University,
717 N. Grand Avenue. Tahlequah, OK, 74464
(e-mail: vanil@nsuok.edu). Phone 918-45&
5511
X3773.
Funding provided
by
the U.S. Department of
Education, Office
of
Special Education Pro-
grams field initiated research (CFDA
84J24C).
Grant award number H324C020045
partially supported
the
preparation
of
this
manuscript.
TEAGHING Exceptional Ghildren,
Vol. 38.
No.
3, pp. 42-47.
Copyright 2006
CEC.
Ad Index
Council for Exceptional Children, 1, 26, 27, 34,
61
Crisis Prevention Institute, cover
4
Curriculum Associates, cover
3
Mesa Public Schools,
55
National University,
63
NOVA Northeaster University,
41
Penn State University, cover
2
Scholastic Teaching,
35
University
of
Nebraska,
54
University
of
Maryland,
60
TEACHING
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
•
JAN/FEB
2006 • 47