 |
||||||||
 |
VPIC Programs | Vermont Special Education Regulations Survey Results Comments made by Parents to a Survey Regarding the Proposed Special Education Regulations, Submitted April 4, 2006 SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS → Functional Assessment; Functional Goals, Functional Performance Under the new IDEA, schools must consider more than a child’s academic performance. Schools must now consider a child’s functional performance, conduct assessments of a child’s functional abilities outside of academics and must develop functional goals as part of a child’s IEP. However, the term “functional” has not been defined in the law itself. Should Vermont’s special education regulations define the term “functional”?
Comments: And an effort should be made to inform all parents and school boards of the definition with an opportunity provided for all to ask questions regarding the definition. This is tough. If it is defined, it can be defined to tightly and then children wouldn't be able to access the services that are needed. If is isn't defined than it leaves it up the DOE to decide what is functioning and still children may not be able to access the services they need. As the parent of a child with Autism, leaving the word undefined may give us more liberty to use it to get services for social deficits. I worry that if the State gets to define it, the scope will be narrowed. A definition of this word would be critical I think. "Functional" can mean many things...able to feed oneself, communicate well in novel social salutations, express oneself on the soccer field... I have a son who is going to be tested. He is one of those students who does well academically but is always told that he can do it and he is lazy. He has difficulties paying attention, easily distracted, and has poor fine motor skills as well as deficits in his social capabilities. Many students fall into the cracks because they don't qualify, and if they don't the teachers will not give them any accommodations or get them the help they need. Please define functional!!!!!! My concern here would be that by defining the term functional, there could be limitations that would not consider each child individually. Tough to conceive of all possible functional limitations. That said, a broad definition to allow a variety of conditions and limitations could be helpful, so parents don’t have to argue this term just to qualify for an IEP. Not all students will meet the academic challenges that school provides. For some students "life skills" are more important than academics. Independent eating, toileting, hygiene, daily skills such as meal preparation, laundry...will have more meaning and impact than learning American History or languages. That would depend on who is making the definition. If it's the law makers, with no working knowledge of children and learning - then no, if it's a collaborative of parents of children with disabilities and teachers and others with intimate knowledge of children with disabilities, then it is probably a good idea. It can't be rigid though, there has to be some flexibility within the definitions. Especially if this is used as part of eligibility determination Absolutely. Without a clear and concise definition, the DOE would be setting itself up for lawsuits! Then the courts would define "functional". By doing this would it create another 'label' for the child? I'd like to hear more on this.... This would only be fair - both to the student and those teaching him Yes! And it should be defined in a broad manner as I think that is the intention of the change. It also should give guidance about what types of assessments are appropriate to use to asses functional abilities (however they are defined). My feeling is that functional relates to the ability to function independently in day to day, academic, recreational, social and vocational settings. "Functional" could be assessed in a way similar to Kindergarten Readiness -- using domains such as: Social/emotional development Approaches to learning Communication Cognitive development/general knowledge Physical health/well-being Which children are eligible should be up to the IEP Team. Not defining the term is too ambivalent for the IEP team Somebody should. The constraint of budgets and staff often lead schools to define kids in terms of resources available instead of defining kids in their own terms. This is a highly individualized term, it can differ widely from a multi-handicapped individual to a child with a learning disability. www.m-w.com (Merriam-Webster Online) Main Entry: func·tion·al Pronunciation: 'f&[ng](k)-shn&l, -sh&-n&l Function: adjective 1 a : of, connected with, or being a function b : affecting physiological or psychological functions but not organic structure <functional heart disease> 2 : used to contribute to the development or maintenance of a larger whole <functional and practical school courses>; also : designed or developed chiefly from the point of view of use <functional clothing> 3 : performing or able to perform a regular function - func·tion·al·ity /"f&[ng](k)-sh&-'na-l&-tE/ noun- func·tion·al·ly /'f&[ng](k)-shn&-lE, -sh&-n&l-E/ adverb My feeling is that they have to not only be realistic for the child, but if they serve no purpose, what is the point? FUNCTIONAL means what it means. Without definitions, there is too much "wiggle room." Again, how does the state expect teams to respond appropriately, when they have failed to define the terminology used. In a way, I think yes, but in another I think no. Sometimes kids can get squeezed in by manipulating terminology. In theory, yes, but do we really trust the folks at DOE to do this? I don't. I do think that this should be defined. A collaborative group of teachers and parents should come to a decision of what this term means. As a parent I have asked my children’s (2 of my children are on IEP's) case managers as well as spec ed director how to interpret this term "functional" and have received a different answer from all of them. Functional should include things like social skills, emotional reciprocity, imaginative play, and flexible thinking - not just skills like toileting! The real purpose of school is to develop children into adults who can care for themselves: emotionally, physically, and financially. FUNCTIONALITY encompasses all three. Yes, it’s very vague. Parents and team should define functional. Means a lot of different things depending on who you ask. But as it applies to each area. Functionality in the classroom, may be different than functional performance in physical education etc. Being careful to help define the term, and not narrow its meaning |
||||||
| VPIC Publications | ||||||||
| Additional Resources | ||||||||
| Legislative Updates | ||||||||
| Workshops Schedule | ||||||||
| News & Events | ||||||||
| Donate Now! | ||||||||
| Family, Infant & Toddler Program |
||||||||
   |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
|
 We are a United Way Agency in Rutland County.
© 2000-2007 by the Vermont Parent Information Center |
|||||||