Local Validation of Mandate Consultant: An Expert System for Assuring Compliance in the IEP Process

Abstract

When schools fail to comply with state and federal regulations regarding IEP development, students, faculty and programs are at risk. Many schools currently conduct internal file reviews to identify and correct compliance problems. Unfortunately, special education file review is a time consuming task which is usually done by an experienced special educator or school psychologist.

Expert system computer programs are designed to allow personnel with relatively low skill levels to complete a task which usually requires a good deal of training and experience. Mandate Consultant is an expert system designed to assist in special education file review. This study uses an easily replicable model to compare the file review performance of a secretary using Mandate Consultant with that of a special education expert.

The secretary produced reports which were five times more accurate and over twenty times less expensive than the reports generated by the expert. Expert systems may provide a practical tool for reducing costs associated with assuring legal compliance.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Budhoff

Orenstein

Abramson

(1981). Due process hearings: Appeals for appropriate public school programs. Exceptional Children. 48, 181–182.

Borg

W.R.

Gall

M.D.

(1983). Education Research: An introduction. New York: Longman, Inc.

Ekstrand

R.E.

(1979). Preparing for the due process hearing: What to expect and what to do. Amicus. 4(2), 91–96.

Fiedler

(1985). Determinants of due process conflict. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Giere

S.S.

Ferrara

J.M.

Gustafson

(1991). Expert System Development for Knowledge Clarification. (Special Education Programs [ED/OSERS] Grant #H029K80072). Washington, D.C.: Department of Education.

Hofmeister

A.M.

(1986). Assessing the accuracy of a knowledge-based system: Special education regulations and procedures. (Special Education Programs [ED/OSERS] Grant #G008530236). Washington, D.C.: Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 284 403).

Hofmeister

A.M.

Ferrara

(1989). Expert Systems and the Evaluation of LD Placements. (Special Education Programs [ED/OSERS] Grant #G008530207). Washington, D.C.: Department of Education.

Henderson

R.A.

Hage

R.E.

(1979). Economic implications of public education of the handicapped. Journal of Research and Development in Education. 12(4), 71–79.

Kammerlohr

Henderson

R.A.

Rock

(1983). Special education due process hearings in Illinois. Exceptional Children. 49, 417–422.

10.

Kirp

David L.

Jensen

Donald N.

(1983). What does due process do? PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania reconsidered. Standard, CA: Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance, Stanford University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 878).

11.

Lubke Margaret

(1988). The development and validation of an expert system-based effective teaching inservice program in remedial mathematics instruction. (Doctoral dissertation, Utah State University, 1988) Dissertation Abstracts International. 49, 3330-A.

12.

Martindale Elizabeth

Ferrara

Campbell

(1987). “A preliminary report on the performance of CLASS.LD” Computers in Human Behavior, 3, 263–272.

13.

Martindale Elizabeth

Hofmeister

Alan M.

(1988). “An Expert System for On-Site Instructional Advice.” Educational Technology. 28 (7), 18–20.

14.

Parry

J.D.

(1985). Mandate Consultant. (computer program), Logan, Utah. Utah State University.

15.

Parry

J.D.

(1986). The development and validation of an expert system for reviewing a special education practice (Doctoral dissertation, Utah State University, 1986) Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 2123-A.

16.

Parry

J.D.

Ferrara

J.M.

(1985). The potential of computer-based expert systems for special educators in rural settings. (Technical paper, Department of education Grant #G008400650). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 261853)

17.

Parry

J.D.

Hofmeister

A.M.

(1986). Development and validation of an expert system for special educators. Learning Disabilities Quarterly. 9, 142–132.

18.

Seland

S.J.

Zirkel

P.A.

(1984). Special education hearings: Prevailing problems and practical proposals. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded. 19 (1) 29–34.

19.

Saretsky

(1975, April). The John Henry effect: Potential confounder of experimental vs. control group approaches to the evaluation of educational innovations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 106 309)

20.

Smith

T.E.C.

(1981). Status of due process hearings. Exceptional Children. 48, 232–236.

21.

Turnbull

H.R.

Turnbull

A.P.

Strickland

(1979). Procedural due process: The two edged sword that the untrained should not unsheathe. Boston University Journal of Education. 161,(3), 40–59.

22.

Van Geldern

(1988). Internal compliance monitoring for public law 94-142: Human or computer expert system? (Doctoral dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, 1988) Dissertation Abstracts International 49, 3003-A.

23.

Zirkel

P.A.

(1983). Building an appropriate education from “Board of Education V. Rowley”: Razing the door and raising the floor. Maryland Law Review. 42, 466–495.