Statement and IEPs

[Athena]

Can anyone explain to me the relationship between the long-term, strategic objectives in a Statement and the shorter term, more specific targets in an IEP?

 

Not too clear on how they fit together.

[Sally44]

My understanding is that everything in the Statement should be provided, and that the IEP contains around 3-4 targets that those involved think are the most relevent targets to be aiming for at that time.

 

Going through the Statement with school is always very useful. What you want to be able to see is how the Statement is being fulfilled in school, how progress is being recorded and monitored and included in the daily timetable.

 

So if the Statement contains things like dinnertime clubs, lunchtime support, social use of language group, emotional recognition programme, writing programme etc. You will want to see that in the daily timetable for your child. You might want to know the targets of the social group or the emotional recognition programme and to know what the outcome of those targets are. Those might be included as IEP targets, or they might not be because something else more important has been identified as the target.

 

TBH it is quite difficult - well I found it was. Outside of the IEPs it was very hard to pin anyone down to having done anything.

 

My son's original Statement also said that evidence of progress in literacy and numeracy would be presented at every IEPs (eventhough they were not always the targets). That was very useful because sometimes they dropped a target eg. in literacy because it was not met and replaced it with something else. And they would say something like "although xxxxx has not met this target we feel that it is not a barrier to him at this time and so everyone has decided to drop it for a while." And sometimes that is the right thing to do. But I always made sure they recorded the target was not achieved and that it had been dropped. Then I would bring it up again say 6 months later.

 

And what I have found is that because the IEP is limited realistically to 3-4 targets, that that has given the SALT a reason to say she can reduce the 1:1 sessions because 'you can only have so many targets at one time'. And I do see what she means to one extent. But if you go into special schools that have SALT/OT on site you see that the SALT works with the teacher (and other professionals), and they differentiate the curriculum to each child so that so much more 'therapy' or 'input' is achieved and included in their day to day schedule. My son has so many things that need working on, and which could be worked on and not included in IEPs, but obviously progress and outcomes monitored. And I have assessment outcomes which demonstrate good progress in the areas worked on, but no progress or a widening of the gap in other areas that were not worked on.

 

So I think it is reasonable for a SALT to work with the teacher to see how they can deliver more of the SALT programme in the daily literacy/numeracy etc.

 

You will not be able to tell from the IEP alone whether the Statement is being fulfilled. You will see 3-4 targets and the outcome of them should be recorded and monitored. I suppose it is rather like an iceberg. With the 10% visible is the IEP and the 90% is not seen unless you shadow your child. Obviously that is unrealistic. But you can go through the Statement with the school's SENCO so you know exactly what they say they will be doing and get it all on your childs daily timetable.

 

I don't know if that has helped at all?

Edited October 5, 2010 by Sally44