AlexandrinJ. R. (2003). Using continuous, constructive classroom evaluations. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 36(1), 52–57.
2.
Alta Loma Elementary School, 102 LRP 31876 (SEA CA 2002).
3.
BartlettL. D.WeisensteinG. R.EtscheidtS. (2002). Successful inclusion for educational leaders. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4.
Black River Falls School District, 40 IDELR 163 (SEA WI 2004).
5.
Code of Federal Regulations (1999). Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities and the Early Intervention Program for Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities; Final Regulations. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
6.
Del Norte County Unified School District, 33 IDELR 50 (SEA CA 2000).
7.
DenhamA.LahmE. A. (2001). Using technology to construct alternate portfolios for students with moderate to severe disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 33(5), 10–17.
8.
Escambia County Public School System, 42 IDELR 248 (SEA AL 2004).
9.
HargroveL. J.ChurchK. L.YsselN.KochK. (2002). Curriculum-based assessment: Reading and state academic standards. Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 48–51.
10.
HundtT. A. (2002).Videotaping young children in the classroom: Parents as partners. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34(3), 38–43.
11.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 to 1491 (1997).
12.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 to 1482 (2004).
13.
JacksonC. W.LarkinM. J. (2002). RUBRIC: Teaching students to use grading rubrics. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 35(1), 40–45.
14.
JonesC. J. (2001). Teacher-friendly curriculum-based assessment in spelling. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34(2), 32–38.
15.
Kevin T. v. Elmhurst Community School District No. 205, 36 IDELR 202 (ND IL 2001).
16.
KleinertH.GreenP.HurteM.ClaytonJ.OetingerC. (2002). Creating and using meaningful alternate assessments. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34(4), 40–47.
17.
Linn-Mar Community School District v. Grant Wood Area Education Agency 10, 41 IDELR 24 (SEA IA 2004).
18.
LoefflerK. A. (2005). No more Friday spelling tests? An alternative spelling assessment for students with learning disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(4), 24–27.
19.
MaagJ. W. (2004). Behavior management: From theoretical implications to practical applications (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
20.
Mason City Community School District v. Northern Trails Area Education Agency 2, 36 IDELR 50 (SEA IA 2001).
21.
PeckA.ScarpatiS. (2005). Instruction and assessment. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(4), 7.
22.
PembertonJ. B. (2003). Communicating academic progress as an integral part of assessment. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 35(4), 16–20.
23.
Pennsbury School District, 102 LRP 10466 (SEA PA 2000).
24.
President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
25.
Rio Rancho Public Schools, 40 IDELR 140 (SEA NM 2003).
26.
RoachA. T.ElliottS. N. (2005). Goal attainment scaling: An efficient and effective approach to monitoring student progress. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(4), 8–17.
27.
SchirmerB. R.BaileyJ. (2000). Writing assessment rubric: An instructional approach for struggling writers. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 33(1), 52–58.
28.
ShinnM. M.ShinnM. R. (2001). Curriculum-based measurement: Cheaper, faster, and better assessment of students with learning disabilities. In DentiL.Tefft-CousinP. (Eds.), New ways of looking at learning disabilities: Connections to classroom practice. Denver, CO: Love.
29.
Sioux City Community School District v. Western Hills Area Education Agency 12, 103 LRP 37969 (SEA IA 2003).
West Des Moines Community School District and Heartland Area Education Agency, 36 IDELR 222 (SEA IA 2002).
32.
WheelerJ. J.RicheyD. D. (2005). Behavior management: Principles and practices of positive behavior supports. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall.
33.
YellM. (1998). The law and special education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
34.
ZelinG. M. (2000). Educational benefit and meaningful progress under the new IDEA. Paper presented at the Fourth Annual Iowa Special Education Law Conference, Des Moines, IA.