Evaluations of individualized education programs (IEPs) over the past decade have pointed to an inoperative IEP process and a questionable document. A three-phased review of data-based research and position papers from 1975 to 1989 reveals a history of IEP inadequacies and passive compliance. These findings are in contrast to the original intent and spirit of Public Law 94–142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA). Implications for special education policy and practice have not been considered. Recommendations include a reexamination of the IEP in the context of the current special education reform debate.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbesonA., & WeintraubF. (1977). Understanding the individualized education program. In TonesS. (Ed.), A primer on individualized education programs for handicapped children (pp. 3–8). Reston, VA: Foundation for Exceptional Children.
2.
AlperT. G. (1978). Individualized educational plans: How well do they work?Sacramento, CA: California State Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 161 235).
3.
Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. (1979). Progress toward a free, appropriate public education: A report to Congress on the implementation of Public Law 94–142: The Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Washington, DC: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 175 196).
4.
Comptroller General of the United States. (1981). Unanswered questions on educating handicapped children in local public schools. Washington, DC: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 209 794).
5.
CrislerJ. R. (1979). Utilization of a team approach in implementing Public Law 94–142. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12(4), 101–108.
6.
DavisB. (1985). IEP management programs. Reports to Decision Makers, 7. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 266 610).
7.
DodaroG. L., & SalveminiA. N. (1985). Implementation of P.L. 94–142 as it relates to handicapped delinquents in the District of Columbia. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
8.
Dudley-MarlingC. (1985). Perceptions of the usefulness of the IEP by teachers of learning disabled and emotionally disturbed children. Psychology in the Schools, 22, 65–67.
9.
EnellN. C. (1983). How to streamline your IEP: A special education handbook on computer-assisted individualized education programs. Carmichael, CA: San Juan Unified School District. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 236 859).
10.
EnellN. C. (1984, April). A cost comparison of preparing special education individualized education programs (IEPs) with and without computer assistance. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 248 667).
11.
EnellN. C., & BarrickS. W. (1983). An examination of the relative efficiency and usefulness of computer-assisted individualized education programs. Carmichael, CA: San Juan Unified School District. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 236 861).
12.
GerardiR. J.GroheB.BenedictG. C., & CoolidgeP. G. (1984). I.E.P.—More paperwork and wasted time. Contemporary Education, 56(1), 39–42.
13.
GilliamJ. E., & ColemanM. C. (1981). Who influences IEP committee decisions?Exceptional Children, 47, 642–644.
14.
GoldsteinS.StricklandB.TurnbullA. P., & CurryL. (1980). An observational analysis of the IEP conference. Exceptional Children, 46, 278–286.
15.
HeshusiusL. (1982). At the heart of the advocacy dilemma: A mechanistic world view. Exceptional Children, 49, 6–13.
16.
JosephJ.LindgrenJ.CreamerS., & LaneK. (1983). Evaluating special education: A study to pilot techniques using existing data in Skokie School District 68, Skokie, IL: Skokie School District 68. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 227 176).
17.
KehleT. J., & GuidubaldiJ. (1980). Do too many cooks spoil the broth? Evaluation of team placement and individual educational plans on enhancing the social competence of handicapped students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13, 552–556.
18.
KelloggR. (1984, September). Computerized individualized educational plans: One way. Paper presented at the Computer Technology for the Handicapped Conference, Minneapolis. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 250 838).
19.
LusthausC. S.LusthausE. W., & GibbsH. (1981). Parents' role in the decision process. Exceptional Children, 48, 256–257.
20.
McGarryJ., & FinanP. L. (1982). Implementing Massachusetts' special education law: A statewide assessment. Final report. Boston: Massachusetts State Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 226 542).
21.
McLoughlinJ. A., & LewisR. B. (1986). Assessing special students. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
22.
MehanH.HertweckA., & MeihlsJ. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
23.
MeyenE. L. (1982). Current practices. In MeyenE. L. (Ed.), Exceptional children in today's schools: An alternative resource book (pp. 63–90). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
24.
MinickB. A., & SchoolB. A. (1982). The IEP process: Can computers help?Academic Therapy, 18, 41–48.
25.
MorganD. P., & RhodeG. (1983). Teachers' attitudes toward IEPs: A two year follow-up. Exceptional Children, 50, 64–67.
26.
MorrisseyP. A., & SaferN. (1977). The individualized education program: Implications for special education. Viewpoints, 53, 31–38.
27.
NadlerB., & ShoreK. (1980). Individualized education programs: A look at realities. Education Unlimited, 2, 30–34.
28.
National Advisory Committee on the Handicapped. (1977). The individualized education program: Key to an appropriate education for the handicapped child. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
29.
NevinA.SemmelM. I., & McCannS. (1983). What administrators can do to facilitate the regular classroom teacher's role in implementing individual educational plans: An empirical analysis. Planning and Changing, 14, 150–169.
30.
PugachM. C. (1982). Regular classroom teacher involvement in the development and utilization of IEPs. Exceptional Children, 48, 371–374.
31.
PyechaJ. N.CoxJ. L.DewittD.DrummondD.JaffeJ.KaltM.LaneC., & PelosiJ. (1980). A national survey of individualized education programs (IEPs) for handicapped children (5 vols.). Durham, NC: Research Triangle Institute. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service Nos. ED 199 970–974).
32.
RinaldiR. T. (1976). Urban schools and P.L. 94–142: One administrator's perspective on the law. In JohnsonR. A. & KowalskiA. P. (Eds.), Perspectives on implementation of the “education for all handicapped children act of 1975” (pp. 135–152). Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 145 599).
33.
RuckerC. N., & VautourJ. A. (1978). IEPs: Don't forget the regular classroom teacher!. In WeinerB. (Ed.), Periscope: Views of the individualized education program. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
34.
RyanL. B., & RuckerC. N. (1986). Computerized vs, noncomputerized individualized education programs: Teachers' attitudes, time, and cost. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8 (1), 5–12.
35.
SalviaJ., & YsseldykeJ. E. (1988). Assessment in special and remedial education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
36.
SchenckS. J. (1980). The diagnostic/instructional link in individualized education programs. Journal of Special Education, 14, 337–345.
37.
SchenckS. J. (1981). An analysis of IEPs for LD youngsters. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14, 221–223.
38.
SchenckS. J., & LevyW. K. (1979, April). IEPs: The state of the art—1978. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 175 201).
39.
SchipperW., & WilsonW. (1978). Implementation of individualized educational programming: A problem or an opportunity?Washington, DC: National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 155 881).
40.
SkrticT. M. (1987). An organizational analysis of special education reform. Counterpoint, 8(2), 15–19.
41.
SkrticT. M.GubaE. G., & KnowltonH. E. (1985). Interorganizational special education programming in rural areas: Technical report on the multisite naturalistic field study. (Contract No. 400-81-0017). Lawrence: University of Kansas, Department of Special Education.
42.
SmithS. W. (1990). Comparison of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) of Students with behavioral disorders and learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education. Vol. 24 (1), 85–100.
43.
SmithS. W., & SimpsonR. L. (1989). An analysis of individualized education programs (IEPs) for students with behavior disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 14, 107–116.
44.
TurnbullH. R. (1986). Free appropriate public education: The law and children with disabilities. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
45.
WittJ. C.MillerC. D.McIntyreR. M., & SmithD. (1984). Effects of variables on parental perceptions of staffings. Exceptional Children, 51, 27–32.
46.
YsseldykeJ. E., & AlgozzineB. (1982). Critical issues in special and remedial education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
47.
YsseldykeJ. E.AlgozzineB., & AllenD. (1982). Participation of regular education teachers in special education team decision making. Exceptional Children, 48, 356–366.
48.
YsseldykeJ. E.AlgozzineB.RicheyL., & GradenJ. (1982). Declaring students eligible for learning disability services: Why bother with the data?Learning Disability Quarterly, 5 (1), 37–44.
