Improving Access for Students Who Are Deaf-Blind Through Collaboration

Maya and Antonio are two deaf-blind students in neighboring districts. Maya is a sixth-grade student who has cerebral palsy, a mild intellectual/developmental disability, developmental delay, and cortical visual impairment (CVI). Maya is deaf and has a cochlear implant. She is nonspeaking, meaning spoken language is not a reliable form of communication, and she uses an augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device to communicate. Maya’s AAC device has an array of 3-inch symbols that are brightly colored, high-contrast visuals with tactile components She uses a wheelchair and has her AAC device mounted to her work tray. Her primary educational setting is a self-contained special education classroom with inclusion in art, music, physical education, and lunch with peers.

Antonio is an eighth-grade student with Usher syndrome. Antonio is deaf with bilateral hearing aids and has vision in his central visual field with progressively decreasing peripheral vision. He uses a white cane at school and in the community. Antonio primarily uses American Sign Language (ASL) at school and spoken English at home. He is included in the general education curriculum for all academic subjects. He will turn 14 soon, so the team will begin planning for Antonio’s postsecondary transition by updating his assessment data, adding college interest inventories, and updating his accommodations.

Students who are deaf-blind represent a diverse group of individuals characterized by highly heterogenous strengths, abilities, and support needs. Deaf-blindness rarely indicates that a student is completely deaf and completely blind; most have some functional hearing and vision (Bruce et al., 2018). Deaf-blind students may use spoken language, sign languages (e.g., ASL), individualized communication (e.g., home signs, cues, or gestures), AAC (e.g., line drawings, photos, real objects, tactile symbols; all in appropriate size and contrast based on individual student needs), tactile communication (e.g., ProTactile ASL, haptics), or a combination of communication modes.

Consistent, high-quality special education services improve outcomes for students who are deaf-blind. Students’ unique services are protected by their individualized education program (IEP) and informed by the IEP team’s assessments. Three specific areas identified for targeted, systemic development to improve postsecondary outcomes for students who are deaf-blind are (a) collaboration among professionals, (b) understanding of individual students, and (c) increasing access to quality transition services (Barnhill, 2021). Although Barnhill (2021) proposed these areas as a focus for supporting students through transition and postsecondary success, we find these are equally important for in-school success. By applying this conceptual framework, professionals can work to improve the student’s current access and success, thereby enhancing the student’s postsecondary outcomes through the domains of (a) collaboration between professionals, (b) individualized student data, and (c) improving student access.

Collaboration Between Professionals

Key Collaborative Professionals

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; 2004) mandates all students with disabilities, including deaf-blindness, have equal access to their education regardless of their communication modality or the severity of their disability. It is best practice that every student who is deaf-blind has professionals with specific expertise and training on deaf-blindness on their educational team. However, teachers of deaf-blind students (TDBs) are not mandated to be part of the eligibility team for deaf-blind students in any state (Travers & Schles, 2023). Only a few states have specific legislation or personnel preparation programs specifically about/for TDBs (Parker & Nelson, 2016). As a result, very few deaf-blind students have regular services with a TDB. Furthermore, interveners are the nationally recognized paraprofessional specifically trained to support, communicate with, and facilitate environmental access for deaf-blind students. There are distinct differences between the roles and responsibilities of educational interpreters (EIs) and interveners, which are important for team members to understand (e.g., Florida Department of Education, 2012). Yet few states formally recognize the profession or require students who are deaf-blind to receive support from formally trained interveners (Parker & Nelson, 2016). Consequently, deaf-blind students rely on service providers and educators who are knowledgeable in sensory disabilities rather than solely focused on deaf-blind students to fill gaps to develop appropriate programming. Key personnel for this population include teachers of students with visual impairments (TVIs), orientation and mobility (O&M) specialists, teachers of d/Deaf and hard-of-hearing students (TODs), and EIs. EIs will need additional training to meet the needs of deaf-blind students. This training could come from a collaborative working relationship with the TVI and O&M specialists and other trained professionals and organizations. Table 1 provides a summary of professional responsibilities for these IEP team members. Through collaboration with these sensory specialists, the students’ educators and providers (e.g., classroom teachers, specials teachers, educational assistants, therapists) will define their responsibilities toward deaf-blind students.

Table 1

Key Collaborative Professionals

Profession	Roles and responsibilities (scope of practice)	Credentialing body
Educational interpreter (EI) a	• Interprets print and visual information in the educational environment • Interprets social and visual context in the educational environment • Positions themselves and student to optimize language access • Ensures effective communication across signed and spoken languages • Models social/emotional/advocacy strategies to promote peer inclusion • Models professional standard to teach student how to use interpreter	(1) Center for Assessment of Sign Language Interpretation used by Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (2) Boys Town Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment Training Center (3) State quality assurance screening (4) Board for Evaluation of Interpreters Certification Program
Orientation and mobility (O&M) specialist b	• Plans and conducts orientation and mobility assessments • Fosters understanding of safe, efficient travel; teaches white cane skills • Develops body, spatial, and environmental concepts • Trains other team members in integration of mobility techniques • Modifies environment based on individual assessment data	(1) Academy for Certification of Vision Rehabilitation & Education Professionals (2) National Blindness Professional Certification Board (3) State department of education
Teacher of students who are d/Deaf or hard-of-hearing (TOD) c	• Conducts functional hearing evaluations • Supports audiologist in the maintenance of amplification devices • Trains other team members on use of amplification devices • Develops accommodations and individualized education program goals for auditory training with safe travel • Facilitates collaboration/community access to other d/Deaf people • Supports the development of spoken and visual language	State department of education
Teacher of students who have visual impairments (TVI) d	• Conducts functional vision, literacy, and Expanded Core Curriculum assessments • Interprets medical vision reports • Provides braille and Expanded Core Curriculum instruction • Works with other team members to ensure visual access • Provides instruction in optical devices and assistive technology	State department of education

a

National Association of Interpreters in Education (2021).

b

Kaiser et al. (2018).

c

Sutherland and Tabb (2021).

d

Spungin et al. (2016).

Strategies to Promote Meaningful Collaboration

Despite preferential seating, Antonio struggles in some classes when he must shift his gaze to look between the board, his EI, and the teacher. His classroom teachers reported Antonio sometimes appears to tune out completely, only looking at his EI, thus missing key information on the board. Although Antonio is an engaged student, his teachers note that grasping new concepts that he has never experienced is a major hurdle. His TVI explained that he does not have the same prior knowledge to draw from as his peers due to his deaf-blindness. His TVI and TOD address concept gaps through preteaching when they are given lesson plans in advance, but communication is often disjointed between the special education and general education teams. On days with heavy academic content, his EI has noticed significant fatigue from the visual, auditory, and cognitive processing load Antonio must balance.

To begin their collaborative partnership on a productive note, all IEP team members should clearly establish their roles. This includes clarifying the type of support each professional will bring to the IEP team and direct support of the student. Finding time for collaboration is a challenge frequently faced by IEP teams (Black & Hill, 2020; Da Fonte & Barton-Arwood, 2017). Sixty-eight percent of deaf-blind students 6 to 22 years old spend at least part of their school day in a “regular classroom,” not in separate learning environment (National Center on Deafblindness [NCDB], 2025). This means that most students are supported by itinerant TVIs, TODs, and O&M specialists working across multiple schools. Because these personnel are not typically at the school on a daily basis, direct communication may be limited in both frequency and time. Team members should seize any opportunity for direct collaboration, even if it is a short conversation (Black & Hill, 2020). Indirect collaboration can be successful when there is consistency and a form of communication that each member of the team finds personally effective. Email, voice memos, and shared cloud folders with data are all important tools in an IEP team’s collaborative toolbox.

“Sixty-eight percent of deaf-blind students 6 to 22 years old spend at least part of their school day in a “regular classroom,” not in separate learning environment (National Center on Deafblindness [NCDB], 2025).

Through the process of collaborative preplanning, the team can identify gaps in students’ knowledge (due to their sensory disabilities) that typically sighted and hearing peers gain incidentally (Ferrell et al., 2014). The classroom teacher, as the content specialist, provides the core instruction by challenging the student without overwhelming them (Rodriguez-Gil, 2009). This balance of appropriate challenge is best facilitated by the teacher providing their lesson plans to the educational team in advance. Then, the team can effectively plan accommodations and preteach vocabulary in meaningful contexts of the new concepts (Rodriguez-Gil, 2009). The TVI and TOD, as the specialists in sensory disabilities, will provide instruction using the student’s communication modality and address sensory-related knowledge gaps the student may have as part of their instruction in the Expanded Core Curriculum (ECC). The ECC is a set of nine skill areas that have been identified in which students with sensory disabilities need explicit instruction. EIs should always facilitate instruction in the presence of a licensed teacher and only if facilitating instruction is within their scope of practice for their specific job description. The approach to facilitating instruction will vary based on the student’s developmental and learning needs. This would include but not be limited to preteaching and postteaching information in the lesson taught by the teacher to support language development and access to new vocabulary presented in the instruction.

It is important that all team members are equal contributors in the practice of collaboration; team members can ask for advice or share insights about their own teaching approaches to inform the practices of the team. For example, a classroom teacher can reach out to the TVI or TOD for feedback on how to best present a new concept. Similarly, the TVI or TOD can reach out to the classroom teacher to make sure they fully understand the learning objectives for concepts they are preteaching. The classroom teacher can connect live video chat with TVIs, TODs, and/or O&M specialists to get their professional opinion on the student’s behaviors or engagement in the lesson or record a video of the student completing a particular skill for the specialists to watch at a later time. EIs may work more closely with the classroom teacher when supporting highly technical lessons. When appropriate, teams may also choose to co-teach.

Individualized Student Data: It All Begins With Assessment

Individualized student data must be collected to determine special education eligibility, develop the IEP, plan or adapt instruction, and monitor student progress through multiple measures (IDEA, 2004). Students with sensory disabilities require high-quality assessment data to ensure equitable and appropriate support from their IEP team. However, educators conducting the assessments cannot rely solely on standardized testing (Bruce et al., 2018; Nelson et al., 2002). This is due in part to tests not being normed on deaf-blind students (Bruce et al., 2018). All assessments for students who are deaf-blind must be tailored to their communication modalities and adaptive skills. As a result, the quality of the data collected may reflect the assessing professional’s knowledge rather than the student’s performance. Clinical assessments (e.g., eye, audiological, and health exams) should be used to inform the planning of school-based assessments; because they only provide medical information, they cannot be used to directly make educational decisions. Figure 1 highlights the portfolio of assessments that should inform instructional planning for all students who are deaf-blind and professionals trained to conduct each type of assessment. For deaf-blind students with additional disabilities, the appropriate, qualified personnel will conduct additional testing following the same collaborative structure.

Figure 1

Assessments conducted with students who are deaf-blind and responsible individualized education program (IEP) team members

Planning and Conducting Individualized Assessments

Maya’s art teacher, Ms. Lee, recently reached out to Maya’s team for support because she is worried Maya is not engaged during class. She has noticed Maya removing her cochlear implant or closing her eyes during instruction. Maya is adept at expressive communication using her AAC device, but Ms. Lee has a hard time getting Maya’s attention when the class is switching tasks or transitioning. To promote Maya’s engagement in class, Ms. Lee removes Maya’s work tray when she gets to class and has Maya sit at a back table with room for her materials so that she does not accidentally touch other people’s work because she frequently reaches across the table, tactilely exploring her environment. Maya’s IEP team decides on a meeting to plan a new full assessment, including communication evaluations and full vision and hearing assessments, to address concerns because Ms. Lee is not the only teacher on Maya’s team who has noticed these behaviors.

Assessing students who are deaf-blind can be complex and demanding, even for highly qualified professionals (Bruce et al., 2018; Rowland, 2009). Seventy-nine percent of students who are deaf-blind have additional disabilities (NCDB, 2025). Of the 79%, 72% have cognitive impairments, and just more than half, 53%, have complex health care needs (NCDB, 2025). Conventional testing with unfamiliar materials in unfamiliar settings can be particularly stressful (Bruce et al., 2018). Students should have ample opportunity to familiarize themselves with assessment materials, the environment, and the assessors. The team must develop testing strategies and tailor assessment procedures appropriately for each student.

High-quality authentic assessments conducted in the student’s environment and routine can provide relevant and representative data to inform appropriate accommodations and goals (Rowland, 2009). Following best practice, a TDB should be consulted because the assessors (e.g., classroom teachers, educational psychologists, speech and language pathologists, etc.) are not explicitly trained in supporting students with sensory disabilities (Ferrell et al., 2014). However, given the educational team for a deaf-blind student does not commonly include a TDB, preplanning facilitated by the TVI, TOD, and/or O&M specialist will ensure that the results represent the student and their needs accurately.

Promoting access through authentic assessments: example in action

Through interviewing Maya, her teachers, and her family, the team learned more about Maya, including some subtle ways she expresses both discomfort and excitement now that she is in middle school. Teachers reported that she is most emotionally dysregulated after lunch. Her TVI, TOD, and O&M specialist opted to observe together during lunch to find potential triggers for her discomfort. When the other students got loud in the cafeteria, Maya took off her cochlear implant and repeatedly pushed it to the floor each time an adult put it back on her wheelchair tray. Later in the week, the team observed Maya during art class. The team noted that when Maya’s work tray was taken off her wheelchair, it caused her AAC device to be out of reach. They also observed Maya closing her eyes when Ms. Lee was giving verbal instructions. Her TVI explained that students with CVI often close their eyes to focus on auditory inputs because processing multiple forms of sensory information can be overwhelming. Similarly, Maya took off her cochlear implant before she began her art project, a visual task. Maya did a different art assignment from the one the class was doing and was seated alone, isolated from her peers. Ms. Lee explained that she often finds accessible art projects online that are tactile and high contrast, an accommodation in Maya’s IEP.

“Students with multiple and severe disabilities often have subtle ways of expressing wants, needs, likes, and dislikes (Brady, 2022).

Reminder: All Behavior Is Communication

Students with multiple and severe disabilities often have subtle ways of expressing wants, needs, likes, and dislikes (Brady, 2022). Closer observation or support from additional team members may be needed to interpret responses by students who do not use standardized forms of expressive communication. Changes in behavior, vocalizations, and interactions with an object are all forms of communication. Educators must be especially attuned to recognizing and interpreting these modes of communication (Smith et al., 2020). Because behaviors observed during preferred activities often differ from behaviors during low-interest activities, assessors should use both high- and low-interest activities to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of the student (Rowland, 2009). Additionally, emotional regulation should be supported throughout testing by integrating breaks, modeling behavioral self-talk, and pausing testing to allow for the student’s communication of needs (Malboeuf-Hurtubise et al., 2017; Nelson et al., 2002).

Improving Student Access

All students have the right to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE; IDEA, 2004). For students who are deaf-blind to receive FAPE, they must have data-based accommodations in place to support the individual implications of their sensory and other disabilities. Appropriate, effective accommodations will lead to positive changes in the student’s demeanor, engagement, and emotional well-being (Stremel & Welch, 1995). A student in a well-prepared and accessible learning environment will be more confident and comfortable in their space, which increases opportunities for learning and growth.

Access to Learning Environments

The assessments conducted by team members lead to direct recommendations for classroom accommodations for deaf-blind students. It is essential that stakeholders recognize identifying/refining/formalizing accommodations as an ongoing process, continuing beyond initial IEP development. The student and team members should engage in persistent communication to find the often delicate balance between student’s visual, auditory, emotional, and educational needs (Nelson & Bruce, 2016; Parker, 2017). These needs may intersect or conflict. For example, although bright lighting may enhance visual access, it may lead to the student feeling overstimulated or as in the case many students with CVI, require direct lighting of a visual target while in a darkened room. Other common accommodations may include preferential seating, reduced glare, adjustments in lighting and contrast, a larger workspace, desk copies of materials, and integrated use of tactile materials (Clyne et al., 2015; Masuku et al., 2024).

Well-designed environments facilitate efficient learning for students who are deaf-blind. The learning environment should support the student’s cognitive, sensory, and physical needs; it should be predictable, consistent, and engaging, with clearly defined workspaces (Stremel & Welch, 1995). For example, creating physical boundaries or defining spaces with rugs, tactile tape, or landmarks will make it easier for the student to orient themselves (Gense & Gense, 2004). Environmental accommodations must also maximize use of functional hearing and minimize potential sources of auditory distractions. For example, sound-insulating foam may be used to absorb ambient noises that cannot be mitigated by preferential seating or classroom arrangements. Educators may also opt for curtains, tennis balls on chair legs, or room dividers to minimize the effects of the natural sounds of a classroom (Clyne et al., 2015).

Promoting access through understanding the student: example in action

Maya’s team called an addendum IEP meeting, where all team members presented their data and proposed new accommodations. First, Maya will have the option to eat lunch in a quiet space. When she opts to eat lunch in the cafeteria, she can take a short break afterward to reset. A cup holder has been attached to her wheelchair so that she can safely store her cochlear implant during auditory breaks. For visual breaks and to limit visual clutter, Maya will have a black trifold board to set up around her workstation when she chooses. The new IEP requires high-contrast, tactile tape on all community workspaces so she can sit with peers without accidentally touching their work. The team has committed to encouraging peers who sit with Maya to choose the same adapted project as her to enhance the opportunity for mutual activity, interaction, and friendship. To further bolster peer interactions, the speech language pathologist will train IEP team members to share use of her AAC device with peers so that Maya and her classmates can communicate with each other. Ms. Lee and the IEP team will be mindful not to place Maya’s AAC device out of arm’s reach so that her ability to communicate is not taken away.

“. . . it is crucial to broaden perspectives on access to involve authentic social inclusion through communication.

Additionally, the special education director hired an EI well versed in deaf-blind education. The goal is that Maya will begin to learn touch cues and ASL, and the EI will also train Maya’s family, teachers, and related service providers. Given Maya’s unique combination of disabilities, the IEP team will collect data and follow Maya’s preference to determine over time if signing, either visual or tactile, may become a more efficient mode of communication than AAC and what role AAC can play in Maya’s communication repertoire long-term. The EI created a reference flipbook of signs and gestures to stay on Maya’s wheelchair and be updated as she learns new concepts. Maya will have preferential seating closer to the teachers, who can use the reference book as needed to ensure consistent communication.

Access to Communication With Peers

Beyond typical classroom accommodations (e.g., preferential seating and extended time), ensuring students have access to communication with peers is a critical foundation for engagement in school and emotional well-being. In a study of nearly 200 deaf-blind individuals, 40% reported feeling lonely, and around 70% described their difficulty in social interactions as severe or very severe (Dalby et al., 2009). Deaf-blind students develop stronger communication skills in classrooms with a lower student-to-teacher ratio, due in part to the presence of qualified personnel who provide tailored support in close physical proximity (Brady, 2022). Although professional supports have many benefits, one-on-one aides can inadvertently create dependency on adult-led socialization, isolating students from peers (Downing & Eichinger, 2011).

Integrated social supports for communication (e.g., working in pairs, arranging seating in a horseshoe, sharing use of AAC devices) mitigate potential barriers to social development (Brady, 2022). To further support friendship building in inclusive settings, speech language pathologists can support classroom teachers in educating peers on communication modalities used by the target student. Peers often need explicit guidance on how to communicate through an EI to recognize them as a neutral provider of communication access rather than as an adult overseeing their conversation (Masuku et al., 2024). Opportunities to partner with peers should focus on the development of authentic friendships, which are predicated on shared communication, mutual activities, and the ongoing process of getting to know each other, rather than simply having a peer in a helper or tutor role (Biggs & Snodgrass, 2020). While educators often focus on visual or auditory access, it is crucial to broaden perspectives on access to involve authentic social inclusion through communication.

Access to Travel Environments

Antonio’s classroom teachers have recently reported an uptick in tardies, with Antonio missing out on instruction as a result. His O&M specialist has noted that he gets most disoriented in open spaces with large groups of people moving through them. He has two new classes that require him to cross common areas in the school without a familiar, meaningful landmark. On one occasion, he paced the hallway until he got frustrated and decided to go to the library, the nearest well-known space. He felt embarrassed to tell the librarian he did not know where his class was, so he chose a book and read until his EI found him in the library lounge halfway through the class period.

Deaf-blindness affects the O&M of every person in a unique way, dependent, in part, on levels of functional hearing and vision, age of onset of each sensory change, and additional disabilities (NCDB, 2022). Deaf-blind students should receive consistent, explicit instruction from an O&M specialist to develop the skills necessary for travel in their schools and in the community. For students with visual impairments, O&M specialists are trained to teach auditory strategies that promote safe, independent travel. Many deaf-blind people encounter barriers in interpreting or localizing sounds in their environment (Hersh, 2016). TODs and O&M specialists should work together to adapt established O&M strategies to maximize preferred sensory channels when working with deaf-blind students (Sutherland & Tabb, 2021). Appropriately scaffolded movement provides the foundation for independence and future success for deaf-blind students (Cmar et al., 2015).

O&M specialists are the only professionals qualified to provide explicit instruction in high-stakes aspects of travel, such as white cane use, off-campus travel, and street crossings for individuals with visual impairments, including deaf-blindness (Kaiser et al., 2018). However, there are some skills that can be role released by the O&M specialist because they can be practiced in low-stakes environments. Role release occurs when the O&M specialist provides extensive coaching to a team member and entrusts them to support refinement of a travel skill. Through the process of role release, all team members can integrate foundational skills of O&M into their instruction (Casias, 2023). In some cases, small changes can be made to increase independence and integrate O&M concepts, such as increasing wait time or allowing opportunities to practice skills without prompting. It is vital that students practice traveling in varied, meaningful contexts consistently to effectively generalize their skills. Collaborative efforts by the IEP team members to support O&M will foster independence and self-determination, leading to enhanced outcomes (Cmar et al., 2018; Gense & Gense, 2004; Sutherland & Tabb, 2021).

Promoting access through collaboration: example in action

Antonio typically works with his O&M specialist one-on-one, with his EI interpreting. His team realized he had been going into the library during class time when he was getting disoriented in the hallways, and they opted to schedule a collaborative O&M lesson. His TVI, physical therapist, EI, and O&M specialist all met in the hallway before the lesson. With the four professionals and Antonio, the lesson had inadvertently turned into a group activity. The physical therapist began working with Antonio 3 years ago and knew where to stand to best ensure he could see her. However, she realized after a while that he was following her shadow instead of recalling a route, which was the purpose of the lesson. The O&M specialist was able to share common compensatory strategies of deaf-blind students (e.g., following the sound of footsteps, looking at the back of the person in front of them), and she role released after teaching the team how to safely practice the route with Antonio. They remained quiet when he was making decisions, stopped whenever he stopped, and let him lead the way to his classroom. Antonio practiced the route with these educators until he mastered it.

“Collaboration with and between TVIs, O&M specialists, TODs, and EIs can occur in many forms, including preteaching, concept and vocabulary development, and co-teaching, as appropriate.

Building Toward Postsecondary Success and Independence

Barnhill’s (2021) framework creates a structured system for professionals to support deaf-blind students for (a) collaboration among professionals, (b) understanding of individual students, and (c) high-quality assessments to promote access. Educators who support students with sensory disabilities must actively collaborate to address the needs of students who are deaf-blind, especially given the shortage of TDBs. Because most deaf-blind students are educated in their local schools, itinerant educators must collaborate with classroom teachers, related service providers, and other school staff. Collaboration with and between TVIs, O&M specialists, TODs, and EIs can occur in many forms, including preteaching, concept and vocabulary development, and co-teaching, as appropriate. Specialists should also collaborate to conduct individualized assessments, and data from assessments should inform all educational decisions made by stakeholders. Through the development of meaningful relationships, positive employment outcomes, and independent living, students are more likely to achieve postsecondary success (Petroff et al., 2019).

In preparation for Antonio’s postsecondary transition, the team developed a revised IEP with new data from each team member. In addition to revising accommodations, the team increased direct service time with the TVI, TOD, O&M specialist, and EI and consult time for all professionals. Observations, interviews, and direct testing informed recommendations for preferential seating and positioning in each class to optimize Antonio’s best vision and hearing access. The team noted that Antonio was sitting near auditory distractions (e.g., noisy air conditioning units, fans, hallway chatter) in all the classes he reported struggling in.

After direct instruction informed by the assessment, Antonio is now able to advocate for himself to request where the classroom teacher and EI should be positioned in his classes to reduce his gaze shifting and visual fatigue. The assistive technology assessment demonstrated Antonio does best with a copy of the classroom teacher’s lecture in advance and with the projected materials mirrored on a monitor or tablet at his desk. Data from the functional vision assessment showed that Antonio sees best with white text on black backgrounds (inverted from black text on white backgrounds). Antonio now finds it much easier to follow along in class, and his classroom teachers are excited that he is able to be more engaged.

The IEP team maintains collaboration with each other and classroom teachers, who note an improvement not only in Antonio’s academic grades but also in his confidence. He volunteers answers in class and is developing stronger friendships with his peers. Given his academic success and improved social inclusion, the team is especially motivated to ensure his transition to high school is smooth. They set up a plan to meet with the high school teachers before school starts for Antonio to lead a presentation about his disability and accommodations.