Access to the General Curriculum: What It Really Means

W. David Mills, Section ChiefExceptional Children Division

NC Department of Public InstructionJune 2004

Outcomes:

• Familiarity with the requirements

• Clearer picture of expectations

• Suggestions for good practice

Premise: All Children Can Learn

In most all statements of belief, the wording is either “all children can learn” or something similar. In NC, for example, the foundational belief statement in the Problem-Solving Model Project for exceptional children is that all children can learn.

It should go without saying that as educators we believe that all children can learn.

We have, perhaps, all made the often quoted statement:

“If children don’t learn the way we teach, then we must teach the way children learn.”

The questions to ask if all children can learn:

.. Learn what?

.. Learn when?

.. Learn how?

These are not special education questions, but questions for all of education.

Most educators believe that all children can learn, but not learn the same way, the same thing, or at the same time.

It may sound too simple to ask these questions of how, when and what; however, if we don’t, the issue is settled: only one course of study, one timeline, and one instructional methodology. The issue of course of study, would, perhaps, be debated as to which course of study would be adopted.

The SBE and the educational community at large recognize differences in learners. Thus, NC has four courses of study.

It is interesting that the question of where students with disabilities will learn has been settled. The where is the Least Restrictive Environment.

Some argument does occur, however, as to what constitutes the Least Restrictive Environment.

LEGISLATION

PL94-142 (Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975)

• Brought all children to the school

• Supported our belief that all children can learn

PL 101-476 – Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990 (IDEA)• Most PL 94-142 provisions kept in the reauthorization

• Autism added as a disability in its own right

• TBI added

• Rehab Counseling stated as a related service

• Recreational Therapy stated as a related service

• Social Work stated as a related service

• AT Services added

• Transition defined and connected to IEP

• Underrepresented defined (minority, poor, LEP)

• Did not add ADD/ADHD

PL 105-17 – Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA)

• Introduced the concept of aligning special education reform with general education reform

• Required students with disabilities (SWD) to

• have access to the general curriculum

• be involved in the general curriculum

• progress in the general curriculum

No Child Left Behind Act of 2002

• Requires accountability through assessment and students to make adequate yearly progress

• Emphasis is to ensure all students achieve at high levels

Access to the General Curriculum, Progress in the General Curriculum, or General Curriculum is used in IDEA ’97

• 11 times (my count) in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 300.26 – 300.755) for IDEA

• 38 times (my count) in Appendix A

CFR 300.26 Special Education

(b) Individual terms defined

(3) Specially-designed instruction means adapting, as appropriate to the needs of an eligible child … the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction –

(ii) To ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that he or she can meet the educational standards within the jurisdiction of the public agency that apply to all children.

Appendix A to Part 300 of IDEA

Involvement and Progress of Each Child With a Disability in the General Curriculum

“…research, demonstration, and practice over the past 20 years in special education and related services have demonstrated that an effective education system now and in the future must maintain high academic standards and clear performance goals for children with disabilities, consistent with the standards and expectation for all students in the education system, and provide for appropriate and effective strategies and methods to ensure that students who are children with disabilities have maximum opportunities to achieve those standards and goals.”

[Section 651 (a)(6) of the Act]

Appendix A to Part 300 of IDEA continued

“Accordingly, the evaluation and IEP…place great emphasis on the involvement and progress of children with disabilities in the general curriculum. (The term “general curriculum” as used in these regulations,…refers to the curriculum that is used with nondisabled children.)”

Appendix A to Part 300 of IDEA continued

“Must the child’s IEP address his or her involvement in the general curriculum, regardless of the nature and severity of the child’s disability and the setting in which the child is educated?”

“Yes. The IEP for each child with a disability (including children who are educated in separate classrooms and schools) must address how the child will be involved and progress in the general curriculum.”

Appendix A to Part 300 of IDEA continued

“Section 300.347 (a)(1)(2) requires that each child’s IEP include: a statement of measurable annual goals, including benchmarks or short term objectives related to – (1) meeting the child’s needs that result from the child’s disabilities to enable the child to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum.”

Appendix A to Part 300 of IDEA continued

“Thus the IEP team…must make an individualized determination (underlining mine) regarding (1) how the child will be involved and progress in the general curriculum and what needs that result from the child’s disability must be met and facilitate that participation….”

“…a public agency is not required to include in an IEP annual goals that relate to areas of the general curriculum in which the child’s disability does not affect the child’s ability to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum. If a child with a disability needs only modifications or accommodations in order to progress in the general curriculum, the IEP does not need to include a goal for the area; however, the IEP would need to specify those modifications and accommodations.”

Appendix A to Part 300 of IDEA continued

“What are the major Part B IEP requirements that govern the involvement and programs for children with disabilities in the general curriculum?”

“Section 300.347 (a)(1) requires that the IEP for each child with a disability include a statement of the child’s present levels of education performance, including – (i) how the child’s disability affects the child’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum; or (ii) for preschool children, as appropriate, how the child’s disability affects the child’s participation in appropriate activities.”

What is the general curriculum?

• “The curriculum that is used with nondisabled children”

• The NC Standard Course of Study, including the essences

• “The curriculum is that series of planned, systematic learning experiences organized around a particular philosophy of education.” (Paula Goff, “Assessing the General Education Curriculum.” Missouri Innovations in Education, 28(3), 2001.

• Access to the general curriculum “basically means that education planning for students with disabilities has as its foundation the curriculum being taught within the district and that curriculum be presented at a level and in a manner in which students with disabilities can acquire the content.” (Tom Hehir, “Begin Early, End Well.” The School Administrator, 56(24-26), 1999.

English/Language Arts

SCS Competency Goals and Essences

. SCS Goal 1: The learner will develop and apply enabling strategies and skills to read and write

. Essence 1: The learner will develop strategies for communication.

. SCS Goal 2: The learner will develop and apply strategies and skills to comprehend text that is read, heard, and viewed.

. Essence 2: The learner will develop and apply strategies and skills to comprehend outside stimuli.

. SCS Goal 3: The learner will make connections through the use of oral language, written language, and media and technology.

. Essence 3: The learner will make connections (reach, relate, and generalize).

. SCS Goal 4: The learner will apply strategies and skills to create oral, written, and visual text.

. Essence 4: The learner will produce expressive communication.

. SCS Goal 5: The learner will apply grammar and language conventions to communicate effectively.

. Essence 5: The learner will convey a complete thought in a functional manner.

Mathematics SCS

Mathematics Strands and Essences

. SCS Math Strand 1: Number sense, numeration, and numerical operations

. Essence 1: Representing and utilizing numbers

. SCS Math Strand 2: Spatial sense, measurement, and geometry

. Essence 2: Recognizing size, measurement, spatial orientation, and shape

. SCS Math 3: Patterns, relationships, and functions

. Essence 3: Sorting and patterning

. SCS Math 4: Data, probability, and statistics

. Essence 4: Collecting, sorting, organizing, displaying, and/or interpreting data over a period of time (usually two or more items of numerical information) in charts, graphs, and/or tables with correct labeling.

Why the essences were adopted

• To comply with IDEA ’97. Most states have now developed what is being called essences to the standards or extensions to the standards.

• IDEA ’97 speaks of curriculum, not curricula. States are not expected to have separate curricula, even one that is called functional or adapted.

• There is to be one NC Standard Course of Study. That is why the SBE adopted the extensions. The extensions allow the SCS to embrace students with low cognitive function. The intent is to have the SCS cover the curricular needs of all students.

Standards

• The word “standards” is being used in many states and has been used in a number of publications to refer to the general curriculum. Standards driven IEPs is common vernacular in some states.

• Michael Hock in his July-August 2000 In CASE article entitled “Ten Reasons Why We Should Use Standards in IEPs,” states, “The 1997 Amendments to the IDEA don’t specifically require that IEPs be referenced to standards.”

• There are limited references to standards in IDEA. General curriculum is used most.

USDE’s 21st Annual Report to Congress, 1999

“Students can benefit from an emerging body of research that emphasizes the importance of universal design of curricula and instructional materials and of strategies that support access to the general education curriculum. Special educators must possess content knowledge necessary for delivering instruction; students need access to instruction that is individually referenced, intense, frequent and explicit.”

21st Report to Congress, 1999, continued

“Special educators must have sound content knowledge and pedagogical skills. Enhancing access to the curriculum requires ongoing collaboration between general and special educators. Most educators perceive the general educator as having the subject content knowledge needed to teach the curriculum objectives, while the special educator utilizes the modifications and various instructional strategies needed to assist the learning of students with disabilities. It is the combination of their expertise that enhances learning for all students. This ‘blend’ can be achieved in a variety of ways: co-teaching, joint planning, modeling, coaching, etc. Additionally, joint participation and leadership in curriculum development, professional development, and instruction are critical to helping students with disabilities access the curriculum.”

Implications and Expectations for the IEP – Where in the IEP is the General Education Curriculum to be Address?

• First, in the present level of performance, which is to include a statement of how the disability affects the student’s involvement in the general curriculum and a statement of the present level of performance.

• Second, the general curriculum is addressed in the statement of measurable goals and objectives or benchmarks. Goals are identified from the weaknesses noted in the present level of performance that affect the student’s ability to progress in the general curriculum. Simply, if a student is not making progress because of a math concern, a measurable goal is written to address math. If a child is not progressing because of behavior-emotional concerns, a goal is developed to address the concerns.

Third, the service section of the IEP addresses the general curriculum by including related services, supplementary aids and services, modifications, accommodations, including whether the student needs assistive technology, and supports for school personnel. These are to be more than just boxes on the IEP form to check. Deliberation must be given to the need for these services for the student to access the general curriculum.

NOTE: About developing annual goals…”goals should reflect the necessary learning that will lead to a curriculum standard rather than a re-statement of the curriculum standard.” (Nancy Johnson. Presentation entitled “IEPs: Connecting to the NC Standard Course of Study,” 53rd Conference on Exceptional Children, October 28, 2003)

“IDEA 1997: Let’s Make It Work,” CEC, 1999.

The new emphasis on participation in the regular education curriculum is not intended to result in major expansions in the size of the IEP and dozens of pages of details with goals and benchmarks and/or objectives in every curriculum content standard and skills. The new focus is intended to focus attention to the accommodations and adjustments necessary for children with disabilities to access the general education curriculum and the special services which may be necessary for appropriate participation in the particular areas of the curriculum due to the nature of the disability.

Michael Hock asks, “Doesn’t it make sense to design IEPs that help students meet standards – so they can do their best on standards-based assessments, pass from grade to grade and eventually graduate, and in the process help prove that their schools and teachers were indeed accountable? (Michael Hock. “Ten Reasons Why We

Should Use Standards in IEPs.” In CASE, July-August 2000.

Achieving Access to the General Curriculum for Students with Mental Retardation: A Curriculum

Decision-Making Model

by Michael L. Wehmeyer, Dana Lattin, Martin Agran in

Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 2001, 36(4), 327-342

“The intent of providing “access” is identified in the IDEA regulations: [the access provisions] require a description of how a child’s involvement in the general curriculum is a statutory requirement and cannot be deleted. The requirement is important because it provides the basis for determining what accommodations the child needs in order to participate in the general curriculum to the maximum extent appropriate” (italics mine).

Wehmeyer, Lattin and Agran continued

“The modifying clause to associate with ‘access,’ therefore, is ‘to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the child.’ What is determined as ‘appropriate’ is, basically, an IEP team decision, and the challenge ahead is to reform the IEP process to ensure that decisions about a given student’s education are driven by the high expectations embodied in the general curriculum as well as the unique needs of the student….emphasis should be placed as much on the word ‘maximum’ as ‘appropriate.’ The clear mandate is to maximize the student’s involvement in the general curriculum. “

Wehmeyer, Lattin and Agran speak of the added responsibility IDEA ’97 places on the IEP team for making a variety of decisions. In speaking of IEP teams as decision-making entities, they state “… that many IEP meetings are not decision-making meetings. The IEP team, as an entity, typically comes together only annually and, partly due to the infrequency of the meeting, often focuses on crises resolution instead of being a deliberative process. On the other extreme, meetings are too often perfunctory with any real decision about the curriculum or any other topic made in advance of the meeting. One way or the other, the IEP process appears to fall well short of the deliberative, decision-making body that is required for the design of a student’s curriculum.”

Accessing the General Curriculum: Including Students with Disabilities in Standards-Based Reform

by Victor Nolet and Margaret J. McLaughlin

Corwin Press, Inc. 2000

Thoughts on Creating Conditions for Access

• Access is not just about placement in general education classrooms, nor can access be achieved through special education alone.

• Access means different things for different students. There is no single best definition of access, no single set of “things to do” to ensure access, or even one set of criteria for deciding how to provide access.

• The critical elements for ensuring that all students have meaningful access to the general curriculum are the conditions within a school that support the necessary access.

• Expectation that all students will benefit from having access to the general curriculum is foundational.

• Belief in the benefits of the general curriculum for all students must be grounded on the knowledge of content standards and the expectations about what students must learn.

• The school environment must promote flexibility and adaptability. The critical resources, such as teachers and time, must be able to change in response to student needs.

• A…problem is confusing inclusion or participation in the general classroom with access to the curriculum.

• When access seems to work, it is because teachers share a knowledge of the general curriculum and have opportunities to discuss what are the most important aspects of the curriculum to teach.

• All teachers and other specialists…must be able to describe what they expect a student to be able to do as a result of instruction in the curriculum.

• The lack of foundational skills among students poses…a dilemma for teachers.

• In order to focus instruction, special and general education teachers must have a shared language and a strong knowledge of subject matter content. Special education teachers provide the differentiation through presenting subject matter in different ways, using different texts or materials, using technology, and setting expectations. They rely on their general education colleagues for the subject matter content and for guidelines on how to teach a subject so that students with different levels of knowledge can learn. The exact content of this key information may differ for each child with a disability, but the skills and knowledge should be expressed in the form of explicit performance of students. What will they be able to do after the instruction? The targets…should be relevant and attainable, but nonetheless should reflect the key elements of the curriculum.

(Think of NC’s new requirement for licensure of special education teachers.)

Note: The days when general education teachers could reduce the diversity of skills in their classrooms by referring students out to special education are gone. Today all teachers must be skilled at making accommodations. This is no longer something that only special education teachers do. Standards-based school reforms and IDEA ’97 challenge educators to demonstrate that all students can make meaningful progress in the general curriculum.

Access Opportunities

• Access opportunities help get students into the classroom and access learning opportunities, which in turn helps them achieve or work toward standards:

• Supports and services for behavior, language, communication, vision and hearing needs

• Classroom supports – assistants and tutors

• Therapies

• Counseling

• Behavior supports

• Transportation

• Assistive technology

Learning Opportunities

• Classroom accommodations and modifications

• Assessment accommodations and modifications

• Alternate assessments

• Curriculum modifications and adaptations

• Learning strategies

• Instructional strategies

• Adapted and alternative materials

Steps to Help Ensure Access to the

General Curriculum

• Have the general education teacher at the IEP table.

• Assure that all school employed IEP participants know the NC Standard Course of Study.

• Talk about the Standard Course of Study at the IEP table.

• As each weakness noted in the present level of performance is discussed, determine how it will impact the student in being able to access the general curriculum.

Present Level of Performance (Perhaps)

Trish scored at grade level on her state and diagnostic math tests. She scored three years below grade level on her state and diagnostic reading and writing tests. The diagnostic and curriculum-based assessments show she is unable to decode words necessary for reading, and her written expression is slow and labored. Her reading and handwriting interfere with her work in subject areas other than math calculation.

• Think high standards, expect the student to stretch, but be realistic about expectations.

• Take care when (1) wording form the Standard Course of Study or (2) wording from any predetermined statement in a goal bank is stated as an IEP goal. Make certain that the statement is worthy of being a goal, that is, it is specifically supported by the present level of performance, is measurable, and is what the student will learn with a year of instruction.

NOT: Trey will read and understand grade-level material.

OK: Trey will paraphrase the ideas of three literary works by a single author and construct a visual model to compare them to other sources and related topics.

• Discuss the processes related to school learning with respect to the entire curriculum, asking, “How does this ______________ problem manifest itself in biology, health, social studies, and the like?”

• Among the process areas to be considered for goals:

• writing

• reading

• math

• motor

• behavior

• social skills

• skills related to learning (study, organization, etc.)

• speech-language

• transition

• self-help

• Remember that students with disabilities have their disabilities 24 hours each day and in English, math, social studies, science, etc.

We need to remember:

• Exceptional child education is not the answer to poor general education.

• It is not special education that most students need, it is education that is special.

• Each student with a disability deserves a high quality and individually designed education.

Resources

. Goff, P. (2001). Accessing the general education curriculum. Missouri Innovations in Education, 28 (3)1-2.

. Hock, M. (2000). Ten reasons why we should use standards in IEPs. In CASE, July-August, 5-7.

. Johnson, N. (2003). IEPs: connecting to the North Carolina standard course of study. 53rd Exceptional Children Conference, NCDPI.

. Karger. J. & Hitchcock, C. (2004). Access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities. National Center for Accessing the General Curriculum.

. Lindsey, C & Wunder, M. (2001). Linking IEPs to the general education curriculum. Missouri Innovations in Education, 28 (3) 3-5.

. McLaughlin, M.J. (1999). Access to the general education curriculum. Journal of Special Education Leadership. 12(1) 9-14.

Resources continued

. Nolet, V. & McLaughlin, M.J. Accessing the General Curriculum: Including Students with Disabilities in Standards-Based Reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. 2000.

, Wehmeyer, M.L, Lattin, D. & and Agran, M. (2001). Achieving access to the general curriculum for students with mental retardation: a curriculum decision-making model. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4) 327-342.

. California Department of Education. Handbook of Goals and Objectives Related to Essential State of California Content Standards. January 2003.

. Council for Exceptional Children. (1999). IDEA 1997: Let’s Make It Work. Reston, VA.

. Council for Exceptional Children. (1999). IDEA Team Guide. Reston, VA.

Resources continued

. How to help ensure special ed students’ involvement and progress in the general curriculum. IEP Team Trainer. May 2000.

. Accessing the General Curriculum. 2000-01 NASDSE Satellite Conference Services. March 21, 2001.

. Ohio Department of Education. Standards-Based Education in Ohio: Providing Access to the General Curriculum for Students with Disabilities. 2003 (developed by GLARRC).

. Universal Design: Ensuring Access to the General Education Curriculum. Research Connections in Special Education. Fall 1999.

. General Curriculum: Key to New IEPs. The Special Educator. LRP Publications. 1998.

. Access the General Curriculum with a Standards-Reference IEP. The Special Educator. LRP Publications. 1999.

Resources continued

. Conference Proceedings: Meetings of State and Local Representatives, September 29030 & October 20-21, 2003. Expanding access to the general education curriculum meeting. CCSSO/The Access Center: Improving Outcomes for All Students K-8.