Rebecca Long

Professor Evans

EDU 460

Monday, February 28, 2022

IEP Observation Response

1. Name of the observed meeting?

Continued Eligibility Meeting

2. What was the purpose of the meeting?

This was a tri-annual meeting to determine whether a student receiving special education services for

emotional disturbance remained eligible to receive said services.

3. Who was present at the meeting? Was the student involved in the process?

My mentor was present (the attendance of one regular education teacher is necessary to make

the meeting legal), a special education teacher who works with the student was there, two district

administrators for the special education department, and the student’s caseworker. Usually, a parent is

also present but they were not able to attend this meeting. There were also a few other people who

seemed to regularly go to the meeting that couldn’t make it, like the school social worker and another

special education teacher. As for the student, they weren't directly involved in the meeting, but they had

rated themselves on a scale of qualifying characteristics that determine eligibility for special education

under emotional disturbance, and that data was used in the meeting.

4. Who led the meeting and what was the agenda?

The meeting was run primarily by the special education teacher, but one of the district

administrators led portions of the meeting. The agenda was to bring up any concerns about the student's

eligibility, to get an update on their current services, and then go through the checklist of characteristics
that qualify a student for special education services and discuss whether the student meets or does not

meet the criteria.

5. Describe what you observed during the meeting.

I was pleasantly shocked by how well everyone working with this student knew them. I was

expecting this to be an impersonal affair where no one really knew the student, but almost everyone had

worked with them for years. I also wasn’t expecting everyone to be so invested in this student's success

because in my experience IEP meetings and other special education services had been treated like a

necessary evil everyone had to deal with. In this meeting though it was clear that everyone involved had

interacted often with the student and that they were genuinely looking to help them and use what they

know about them to do that. There were many times when someone shared something about this student

that I had never thought of but made sense and was very revealing about their character. Everyone also

seemed pretty much in agreement about what factors on the checklist the student qualified under and

agreed with the teacher and student rankings of areas of concern. Overall, it seemed as if everyone was

familiar with this process and the student which, I think, says good things about the special education

program at Mt. Blue.

6. What was the classroom teacher expected to contribute? By way of discussion? By way of

student work samples?

The classroom teacher was asked about the student's current standing, any trends they’d noticed

in them or their work, if there were any difficulties, etc. I was actually able to talk during this portion and

share how the student had been doing during the last month or so. The classroom teacher was also

encouraged to supply their input into any part of the discussion when discussing the student more

generally. For example, when the students' tendency toward negative self-talk came up both my mentor

and I were able to contribute to the conversation. When it came time to read the list of qualifying factors

to determine eligibility they were expected to say whether they agree or disagree with each statement too.

They were not expected to give any student work samples, only give a general description of their work.

7. What did other participants contribute?

The student’s caseworker discussed some details of the services they provide for the student such as

weekly meetings at the student's house. They also act as a go-between for the students’ therapist, so that

there can be communication about what the student is working on and what they might need help with.

They also offered to discuss anything with the student’s guardian, or pass on any papers or evaluations

that need to be done because they have more reliable contact with them.

The special education teacher provided some really in-depth information on the student's mental state,

history in the program, and their current struggles and positives. They were also the person keeping track

of the meeting minutes and changing any paperwork that needed editing.

My mentor shared anything she felt was valuable to whatever conversation was occurring. She also gave

some more specific information about the student’s performance in her class. She also agreed or

disagreed with characteristics on the checklist for eligibility and agreed with the verdict that the student

still qualified for services.

One of the district administrators provided data collected about the students' performance, teachers’

ratings of the students' risk for certain behaviors that determine eligibility, the student's ratings of those

same behaviors, and general information about what some of the checklist criteria meant. They also

suggested that the students scheduled time to discuss their performance (as determined by their IEP)

would be increased.

The other district administrator also provided general information about what some of the checklist criteria

meant. However, the two main ways they contributed was to look up the students' disciplinary history for

the year and give insight into the student based on their interactions.

8. What was done to make all participants comfortable with the meeting and the process? As an

observer, do you have suggestions or recommendations you might make in this regard?

This seemed like a meeting that happened frequently, or at least this group had meetings

together for similar reasons often because they were all comfortable and familiar with each other. I think

the fact that they were actively listening to each other and then discussing everyone's input was a large
part of why I was feeling comfortable and why they were comfortable with each other. It was also very

clear all throughout that everyone cared deeply about this student and their ability to succeed, so there

was a positive drive behind the meeting. As for suggestions, well the meeting was on Google Meets but

there was no screen sharing happening even when going over the eligibility checklist. I would have liked

to have a copy of that during the meeting, but also if I had been teaching this student all year, having the

list in advance would have given me more time to consider if they met or didn’t meet the qualifications.

9. What kind of preparation will you do as a teacher to be ready to be an active participant in similar

kinds of meetings?

To be honest, I didn’t know there were checklists of criteria students have to continually meet to

qualify for services. I also didn’t really realize how different qualifying for special education services for a

reason like emotional disturbance is then a learning disability. To be an active participant in similar

meetings I would have to have this knowledge and more. I also feel like I need to monitor student

behaviors more because there were helpful insights I gained from the others in the meeting that I wasn’t

even considering because I was focused on academic performance. Overall, I feel like I would need to

familiarize myself with my school’s special education teachers and other personnel and the way special

education qualifications are determined there.

10. How did the meeting conclude? What will be done as follow up?

The meeting concluded after it was determined that the student was still eligible for services. Any

final suggestions were marked, and the special education teacher was making any changes to the

student’s file and paperwork to be confirmed and filed or brought up at an IEP meeting. And, as this is a

tri-annual meeting for eligibility, the only follow-up other than that to do with paperwork was to set another

meeting time.

11. What questions, ideas, or thoughts did this observation raise? How will you follow up on what you

learned or what you might need to learn?

 This seemed like a very comprehensive meeting with people from all specialties, and it made me

wonder if this is the norm at other schools. I can’t ever remember anything like this from my high school

experience, and the IEP meeting I observed during practicum was primarily core education teachers

discussing accommodations with very little special education precedence. The whole experience was

much more personal to the student and productive than I was expecting. That might sound cynical, but

my experience with special education services before this was that they weren't very helpful academically

or personally. So, I was very happy to hear the extent of the help that this student was receiving because

it is necessary support.

To follow this experience up, I am going to look further into Mt. Blue’s special education

department, Maine’s special education eligibility qualifications, and the different ways someone can

qualify for special education outside of learning disabilities.