Entitlement for Special Education
Although the purpose of Heartland's Problem Solving Approach is not to entitle students for special education, the data collected throughout the process contribute significantly to the decision about eligibility and need for special education.
An entitlement decision is the continuation of the problem solving process, at which point it is determined whether additional resources are needed to sustain or improve the intervention(s) currently being provided. This is done in order to provide the student with a free and appropriate public education (FAPE).
During the problem solving process, setting demands such as instruction, curriculum, and environment are assessed as well as the learner's characteristics. Interventions are implemented and specific conditions that enhance and impede learning are systematically reviewed. The central focus of assessment and intervention activities is on how to effectively support future learning.
Heartland Entitlement Requirements
Three types of evaluation data should be available regarding an intervention at the time the team considers whether or not to determine entitlement for special education. Formative evaluation data will be used to evaluate the student's response to various learning conditions and to identify that changes are needed to achieve positive results. Treatment integrity data will give the team information regarding the implementation of the intervention. This information is invaluable in designing future interventions. Finally, summary evaluation data is available to answer the question regarding whether or not the intervention has reduced the discrepancy and address the questions of the continued magnitude of the problem.
The following conditions must be present in order for a student to be entitled to special education:Educational Progress. Previous interventions have failed to sufficiently improve a student's rate of learning and additional resources are needed to enhance student learning or the interventions that have sufficiently improved the student's rate of learning are too demanding to be implemented with integrity without special education resources. The questions to be answered: Is the student's rate of progress, given equal opportunity, less than the rate of typical peers or an expected rate of skill acquisition? Under what learning conditions has the student experienced the greatest rate of gain?
Discrepancy. Given equal or enhanced opportunities, the student's current level of performance is significantly lower than typical peers or identified standards. The question to be answered: Does the student's performance remain significantly different than that of peers or identified standards?
Instructional Needs. Instructional needs have been identified that are beyond what can be provided in general education. This is evident when curriculum, instruction or the environmental conditions need to be very different for the student as compared to the needs of other students in the general education environment. The question to be answered: Does the student continue to need curriculum and instruction that is significantly different than what is provided in the general education classroom? Additionally, what environmental conditions will best enhance the student's performance?
Decision about entitlement are not based solely on one source of data or one person's opinion regarding the needs of the student. To determine entitlement, the team must consider the intervention data in terms of the student's educational progress, discrepancy from peers or a standard, and whether the student's instructional needs have been identified. The learner's characteristics and setting demands are considered and conditions that impede and enhance learning are systematically reviewed. The central focus of assessment activities is on how to effectively support future learning. Figure 5 illustrates the relationship between these three sets of information and the impact on an entitlement decision.
Figure 5: Heartland AEA Decision-Making Model for Special Education Entitlement
Convergent Data
Decisions regarding ongoing intervention needs are based on the convergence of data from multiple sources. Reviews, Interviews, Observations, and Tests (RIOT) (Heartland, 2003; Shapiro, 1996) are procedures used to answer the questions about student progress, discrepancy, and instructional needs. In Iowa, schools are required to use multiple measures to assess student performance on standards and benchmarks. In addition classroom teachers gather a wealth of information regarding student performance on a regular basis. All of these sources of information about the student are utilized to build a compelling case about the needs of the student. Assessment data are gathered at all levels of the problem solving process, but the breadth and depth of these data increase as the needs become more intensive.
When entitlement for special education is considered, there are specific requirements to have convergence of data from multiple sources to answer each of the three questions (the questions about student progress, discrepancy, and instructional needs were described earlier). Table 2 is an illustration of the data that may be collected to answer each of the required areas for entitlement. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, but an illustration of some of the kinds of data used for decision-making.
Table 2. Data Collected within the RIOT Sources for Progress, Discrepancy and Instruction Need
| Reviews | Interviews | Observations | Tests | |
| Student Progress | Reviews of records (cumulative file, report cards, problem solving documentation) to determine progress over time. Reviews progress monitoring data collected during the intervention. |
Interviews with parents or former teachers regarding past patterns of progress. Interviews with intervention implementer regarding rate of progress. |
Observations of behaviors over time with data to indicate progress. Treatment integrity data from observations of implementation. |
Tests given at different points in time so that progress can be noted |
| Discrepancy | Reviews of classroom products to determine student performance as compared to peers. |
Interviews with teacher to determine difference between student performance and expected performance. |
Systematic observations of student performance with peer comparisons. |
Curriculum-Based Measurement results compared to peers or benchmark standard Results of district-wide assessments. Results of multiple measures used to assess district standards and benchmarks. |
| Instructional Needs | Reviews of records to determine instruction that has already been provided, what has been successful, what continues to be needs. Reviews of classroom products to determine error patterns, etc. |
Interviews with teachers, parents, etc. regarding the instructional needs of student. Interviews would address curriculum, instruction, assessment. Additionally, interviews might address needs for accommodations. |
Observations during instruction to determine student's response to instruction. For example: number of guided practices needed, response to feedback, behavior during independent practice. |
Variety of tests to validate assumed causes of difficulties. |
Previous Page | Next Page
(School-Wide Application) |(School Profile)
