| Summary: | 博士 === 國立臺灣師範大學 === 特殊教育學系 === 104 === The main purpose of this study was to establish an “Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) Evaluation Checklist” and applied it to evaluate the contents and qualities of IEPs of elementary students with disabilities in Taipei city. The research consisted of two stage studies. First stage study was mainly to construct the “Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) Evaluation Checklist” based on related laws and literature review. Twelve special education experts and senior elementary teachers were participated in rating the appropriation and adequacy of the checklist to construct the content validity, then seven senior teachers used the checklist to evaluate the consistency in order to construct the scorer reliability. In the second stage study, researcher and 5 co-raters used the checklist to evaluate same students’ IEPs during 2014 to 2015 two consecutive years of 104 elementary students with disabilities in Taipei city.
The main findings were as follows：
1.IEP Evaluation Checklist was a usable IEP evaluation instrument with good content validity and scorer reliability.
2.The IEP Evaluation Checklist was consisted of “case profile”, “IEP requirement content” (12 items), and “quality rating of total IEP content” (50 items) three parts with 62 items.
3.More than 90% “IEP requirement content” of the elementary students with disabilities’ in Taipei city were matched with their special needs.
4.The best area of quality rating part on the students’ IEPs both of the self-contained classes and resource classrooms from 2014 to 2015 was “administrative management and execution”. Followed by “special education, related service and support strategies”, “students’ present level and needs assessment”, “annual goals and short term objectives”, “behavioral intervention program”. The quality of “transition services”, however, needed to be improved.
5.The “students’ present level and needs assessment” area was not only written in measurable terms but also provided suitable curricula based on students’ special needs. The stated assessment records, however, were more than one year, and lacked of adaptations on instructional designs, learning assessments, and learning environment as well.
6.The “special education, related service and support strategies” area of these students’ IEPs could match their abilities and special needs. The lessons of some area/subject provided, however, didn’t match students’ annual goals. Also, the contents of related services of the IEPs were not stated clearly.
7.In the “annual goals and short term objectives” area, The IEP contents were consistent with provided special education services, and the objectives indicated that were beneficial to enhance students’ participations on general education curriculum and activities. However, the consistency, observables, age-appropriation, generalization, and accessibility of IEPs’ annual goals/objectives’ were needed to be improved.
8.The ”behavior intervention programs” of these IEPs were not well-developed according to their emotional/behavioral problems and lack of the statements on needed administrative supports.
9.The “transition services” area of these IEPs were mainly developed for the 6 graders, which was the last elementary school study year, but lack of the transition needs in other grades. The most common item provided was academic guidance.
10.Although the quality of the “administrative management and execution” area was very good, still many IEPs’ meetings were not held before the school year began and needed to be improved.
According to the research finding, some suggestions were made for future implementation.
|
|---|
