Quality of Individualized Education Programs (IEP) Developed in Special Education School

Öz

Individualised education programs one of the basic principles of special education. It is stated that individualised education programs quality should be monitored to ensure that the goals and services determined in individualised education programs are implemented and monitored as planned. Studies examining individualised education programs concluded that quality levels were generally low. However, it was also observed that there were limitations in the psychometric properties of the tools used in these studies. This study's purpose is to develop a valid and reliable tool to evaluate individualised education programs quality and examine the qualities of individualised education programs using the created tool. At the first stage of the study, the Individualised Education Program Quality Assessment Scale was developed, and its validity and reliability were tested using 180 individualised education programs . At the second stage, the quality of 211 individualised education programs was examined using the scale. Results indicated that the Individualised Education Program Quality Assessment Scale was a valid and reliable scale, the quality scores of individualised education programs were low, the number of goals was very high, the quality scores decreased as the school stage increased, and they differed according to the diagnosis and professional experience of teachers. The results suggest that teachers experience difficulty preparing individualised education programs, individualised education programs are not used as educational guides, and individualised education programs are prepared as documents only due to legal necessity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Special education
• Individualised education program
• IEP quality
• IEP quality scale

Özel Eğitim Okullarında Geliştirilen Bireyselleştirilmiş Eğitim Programlarının (BEP) Kalitesinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı özel eğitimin temel ilkelerinden biridir. Bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programında amaçların ve hizmetlerin belirlendiği biçimde uygulandığından ve izlendiğinden emin olmak için bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı kalitesinin belirlenmesi ve takip edilmesi gerektiği ifade edilmektedir. Bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programlarının kalitesinin genel olarak düşük olduğu ifade edilmektedir. Ayrıca kalite incelemesi amacıyla kullanılan araçların psikometrik niteliklerinde sınırlılıklar söz konusudur. Bu araştırmanın amacı; bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı kalitesini değerlendirmeyi hedefleyen geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmek ve geliştirilen araçla özel eğitim okullarında geliştirilen bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programının kalitelerini incelemektir. Araştırmanın birinci aşamasında Bireyselleştirilmiş Eğitim Programı Kalitesini Değerlendirme Ölçeği geliştirilmiş ve 180 bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı kullanılarak geçerliliği ve güvenirliği sınanmıştır. İkinci aşamasında Bireyselleştirilmiş Eğitim Programı Kalitesini Değerlendirme Ölçeği kullanılarak, 211 bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programının kalitesi incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda Bireyselleştirilmiş Eğitim Programı Kalitesini Değerlendirme Ölçeğinin geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçek olduğu, bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programlarının kalite puanlarının düşük olduğu, amaç sayılarının çok yüksek olduğu, okul kademesi yükseldikçe kalite puanlarının düştüğü, tanıya ve öğretmen mesleki deneyimine göre kalite puanının farklılaştığı görülmüştür. Elde edilen sonuçlar; öğretmenlerin bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı hazırlamakta güçlük çektiğini, eğitsel bir rehber olarak bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programlarının kullanılmadığını ve bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programlarının yalnızca yasal zorunluluk sebebiyle bir belge olarak hazırlandığını düşündürmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Özel eğitim
• Bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı
• BEP kalitesi
• BEP kalitesi ölçeği

Kaynakça

1. Berninger, V. W. (1997). Introduction to intervention for Students with learning and behavior problems: Myths and realities. School Psychology Review, 26(3), 326-332 https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1997.12085870
2. Boavida, T., Aguiar, C., McWilliam, R. A., & Pimentel, J. S. (2010). Quality of individualized education program goals of preschoolers with disabilities. Infants and Young Children, 23(3), 233-243. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0b013e3181e45925
3. Boavida, T., Aguiar, C., & McWilliam, R. A. (2014). A training program to improve IFSP/BEP goals and objectives through the routines-based interview. Topic in Early Childhood Special Education, 33(4), 200-211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121413494416
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. (18. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
5. Can, A. (2019). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi. Pegem Akademi.
6. Catone, W. V., & Brady, S. A. (2005). The inadequacy of individual educational program (IEP) goals for high school students with word-level reading difficulties. Annals of dyslexia, 55(1), 53-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-005-0004-9
7. Christle, C. A., & Yell, M. L. (2010). Individualized education programs: Legal requirements and research findings. Exceptionality, 18(3), 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2010.491740
8. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc

9. Çıkılı, Y., Gönen, A., Bağcı, Ö. A., & Kaynar, H. Özel Eğitim Alanında Görev Yapan Öğretmenlerin Bireyselleştirilmiş Eğitim Programı (BEP) Hazırlama Konusunda Yaşadıkları Güçlükler. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15(1), 5121-5148.
10. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5 (4), 194-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
11. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications. (3th ed.). SAGE Publications Inc.
12. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistic using SPSS (3rd Edition). Sage Publications.
13. Fiscus, E. D., & Mandell, C. J. (2002). Bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programlarının geliştirilmesi BEP. (2. Baskı). (G. Akçamete, H. G. Şenel ve E. Tekin, çev.). Anı Yayıncılık.
14. Fuchs, L. S. & Shinn, M. R. (1989). Writing CBM IEP objectives. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), (pp.130– 152). Guilford Press.
15. Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E. & Airasian, P. W. (2012) Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (Tenth Edition). USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
16. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
17. Giangreco, M. F., Dennis, R. E., Edelman, S. W., & Cloninger, C. J. (1994). Dressing your IEPs for the general education climate analysis of IEP goals and objectives for students with multiple disabilities. Journal for Special Educators, 15(5), 288-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259401500504
18. Gibb, G. S. & Dyches T. T. (2016). IEPS: writing quality individualized education programs (3rd. ed.). Pearson Publications.
19. Goodrich-Andrade, H. (2000). Using rubric to promote thinking and learning. Educational leadership, 57(5), 13-19.
20. Haladyna, T. M. (1997). Writing Test Item to Evaluate Higher Order Thinking. Allyn and Bacon.
21. Heward, W. L., Alper-Morgan, S.R., & Konrad M. (2017). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (11th ed.). Pearson Publications.
22. Ho, R. (2006). Handbook of univariate and multivariate data analysis and interpretation with SPSS. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
23. Huck, S. W. (2012). Reading statistic and research. (6th ed.). Pearson Educations, Inc.
24. Hunt, P., Goetz, L., & Anderson, J. (1986). The quality of IEP objectives associated with placement on integrated versus segregated school sites. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 11(2), 125-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/154079698601100206
25. Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group
26. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of chiropractic medicine, 15(2), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
27. Kutlu, Ö., Doğan C. D. & Karakaya, İ. (2014). Ölçme ve değerlendirme. Pegem Akademi.
28. Le Salle, T. P., Roach, A. T., & McGrath, D. (2010). The relationship of IEP quality to curricular access and academic achievement for students with disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 28(1), 135-144.
29. Legendre, P. (2005). Species associations: the Kendall coefficient of concordance revisited. Journal of agricultural, biological, and environmental statistic, 10(2), 226-245 https://doi.org/10.1198/108571105X46642
30. Lowman, J. J. (2016). A comparison of three professional development mechanisms for improving the quality of standards-based IEP objectives. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 37(4), 211-224. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740115595338
31. Lucas, A., Gillaspy, K., Peters, M. L., & Hurth, J. (2014). Enhancing recognition of high quality, functional IEP goals: A training activity for early childhood special education staff. http://www.ectacenter.org/~pdfs/pubs/rating-IEP.pdf
32. Lynch, E. C., & Beare, P. L. (1990). The quality of IEP objectives and their relevance to instruction for students with mental retardation and behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 11(2), 48-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259001100207
33. McWilliam, R. A. (01.04.2021). Goal Functionality Scale. https://www.utoledo.edu/education/grants/direct/pdf/Goal_Functionality_Scale.pdf
34. McWilliam, R. A. (01.04.2021). Goal Functionality Scale III. https://ectacenter.org/~pdfs/topic/families/GoalFunctionalityScaleIII_2_.pdf
35. Mertler, C. A. (2001). Designing scoring rubric for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 7(25), 1-10
36. Moskal, B. M. & Leydens, J. A. (2000). Scoring rubric development: Validity and reliability. Practical assessment, research, and evaluation, 7(10), 71-81.
37. Nunnally, J.C. & Bernstein, I.R. (1994), Psychometric theory (3rd. Ed.). McGraw-Hill.
38. Özdamar, K. (2017). Ölçek ve test geliştirme yapısal eşitlik modellemesi. Nisan Kitapevi.
39. Öztürk, C. Ç. & Eratay, E. (2010). Eğitim uygulama okuluna devam eden zihin engelli öğrencilerin öğretmenlerinin bireyselleştirilmiş eğitim programı hakkında görüşlerinin belirlenmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 145-159.
40. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS Survival Manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (7th ed.). Routlege Taylor and Francis Group.
41. Pretti-Frontczak, K., & Bricker, D. (2000). Enhancing the quality of individualized education plan (IEP) goals and objectives. Journal of Early Intervention, 23(2), 92-105. https://doi.org/10.1177/105381510002300204
42. Rakap, S. (2015). Quality of individualised education programme goals and objectives for preschool children with disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30(2), 173-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2014.986909
43. Roach, A. T., Chilungu, N., La Salle, T. P., Talapatra, D., & Vignieri, M., (2009). Opportunities and options for facilitating and evaluating access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(4), 511-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560903240954
44. Rowland, C. M., Quinn, E. D., & Steiner, S. A. (2015). Beyond legal: crafting high-quality IEPs for children with complex communication needs. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 37(1), 53-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740114551632
45. Ruble, L. A., McGrew, J., Dalrymple, N., & Jung, L. A. (2010). Examining the quality of IEPs for young children with autism. Journal Of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(12), 1459-1470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1003-1
46. Sanches-Ferreira, M., Lopes-dos-Santos, P., Alves, S., Santos, M., & Silveira-Maia, M. (2013). How individualised are the Individualised Education Programmes (IEPs): an analysis of the contents and quality of the IEPs goals. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(4), 507-520. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.83043
47. Shinn, M. R., & Shinn, M. M. (2000). Writing and evaluating IEP goals and making appropriate revisions to ensure progress and participation in general curriculum. In C. Telzrow ve M. Tankelersley (Eds.), IDEA Amendments of 1997: Practice guidelines for school-based teams (pp. 351–382). National Association of School Psychologists.
48. Smith, S. W., & Simpson, R. L. (1989). An Analysis of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for Students with Behavioral Disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 14(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874298901400206
49. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2014). Using multivariate statistic. (6th ed.) Pearson Education Limited