Group items tagged

The goal of this module is to help us do better at this important task of early identification, because the earlier we can recognize the signs, the earlier we can start treatment.  Early identification and treatment are central to positive outcomes for children with autism as they grow and develop ( Rogers, 1996; Smith, Groen, & Wynn, 2000). 

To learn more and to access the online survey, go to http://ehhs.kent.edu/link/ What: Steve Bagnato, John Neisworth, and Kristie Pretti-Frontczak are inviting those who work with young children from birth to age eight to participate in a consumer rating of early childhood assessment measures. Results will expand upon LINKing Authentic Assessment & Early Childhood Interventio, by Stephen Bagnato, John T. Neisworth, & Kristie Pretti-Frontczak, 2010. The survey takes about 10 minutes per assessment. The website will be open until March 18th.  Input is being sought from teachers, family members, paraprofessionals, administrators, related service providers, therapists, consultants, social workers, school psychologists, child care providers, nurses, or others who have familiarity with early childhood assessment measures to participate. For questions or concerns: Contact Dr. Kristie Pretti-Frontczak at 330-672-0597 or kprettif@kent.edu. Information about Kent State University's rules for research can be obtained from Dr. John West, Vice President and Dean, Division of Research and Graduate Studies 330-672-2851.

A Vanderbilt research program that trains community pediatricians to diagnose autism within their individual practices may lead to more effective treatment of the disorder that now affects an estimated one in 88 children. Vanderbilt University Medical Center researchers released today in the journal Autism the results of a three-year study that evaluated the effectiveness of a training program designed to enhance autism spectrum disorder (ASD) identification and assessment within community pediatric settings across Tennessee.

The Response-to-Intervention (RtI) movement is enabling public education in the United States to evolve from a reactive model in which students had to seriously deteriorate before being moved on to special education programs, to one that emphasizes early and high-quality research-based interventions in regular programs that generate useful data with which to make key decisions for each struggling student. This evolution, however, has taken place against a backdrop of legal requirements for special education referrals and evaluations that remain almost unchanged from those of more than 30 years ago. The meeting of RtI innovations and the traditional child-find requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) has many scratching their heads over exactly how the rules fit into the modern intervention era. Both the misconceptions that have become commonplace, as well as the legal disputes created by this juncture, make one wonder whether we truly grasp the fundamental child-find obligation of the IDEA in its present context.

The Response-to-Intervention (RtI) movement is enabling public education in the United States to evolve from a reactive model in which students had to seriously deteriorate before being moved on to special education programs, to one that emphasizes early and high-quality research-based interventions in regular programs that generate useful data with which to make key decisions for each struggling student. This evolution, however, has taken place against a backdrop of legal requirements for special education referrals and evaluations that remain almost unchanged from those of more than 30 years ago. The meeting of RtI innovations and the traditional child-find requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) has many scratching their heads over exactly how the rules fit into the modern intervention era. Both the misconceptions that have become commonplace, as well as the legal disputes created by this juncture, make one wonder whether we truly grasp the fundamental child-find obligation of the IDEA in its present context.

Click here to download the Brochure with Registration Information (PDF) Vision Net training is for kids 0-6 with sensory losses and other disabilities. It will start Jan. 13 -- instructors need advanced registrations to get materials assembled and vision net sites. Please fill out the attached registration form if interested.  Topics will include brain development, sensory processing, family centered practices, use of touch, hearing, vision system, CVI, communication, motor development and more. What: INSITE Basic Training prepares early intervention professional to work with families in acquiring information, skills and support to facilitate the development of their young children who have sensory impairments combined with other disabilities. It includes a comprehensive overview of the rationale and organization of the INSITE Model, including early identification, administration and supportive service components. The majority of the training time is devoted to training in the direct services to families. Participants become familiar with the INSITE resource manual (purchased separately by participants)  which contains information and learning activities for families on early communication, audition, vision, cognition, motor impairments, and the development of auditory and visual skills. They learn about the INSITE approach to information gathering, child assessment and program planning needed for developing the IFSP.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004 makes significant and controversial changes to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Two very significant changes in this law are provisions that (a) allow school districts to spend up to 15% of their IDEA Part B funds on early intervening services in general education settings and (b) prohibit states from requiring that school districts use discrepancy formulas to determine if students are eligible for special education services in the category of learning disabilities. Additionally, Congress recommended that school districts use a response to intervention procedure in both early intervening services and for the identification of students with learning disabilities. In this article we first describe two significant reports that recommended that Congress abandon the current eligibility system in special education for students with high-incidence disabilities. Second we explain how Congress and the U.S. Department of Education changed the special education eligibility system for learning disabilities in the IDEIA and the regulations that implemented the IDEIA. Third we review due process hearings and court cases that have addressed response to intervention. Fourth we offer recommendations to teachers, administrators, and teacher trainers to ensure that they meet the letter and spirit of these new requirements of the IDEIA.

Click here to download the registration form for this event (PDF) What: Recent studies indicate that the rate of an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in children with Down syndrome (DS) is higher than previously reported. Early detection of ASD is critical because early intervention has been associated with more favorable child outcomes and therefore, the presence of ASD in a child with DS has implications for treatment and special education decisions. However, identifying ASD in children with DS is difficult because of overlapping symptoms, the presence of cognitive and language delays and deficits, and other developmental factors. Moreover, little is known about what autism assessment measures are valid for use with children with DS. This talk reviews the various issues surrounding the accurate identification of ASD in children with DD and presents a set of considerations to assist evaluators in selecting appropriate screening and diagnostic assessment protocols. When: May 18, 2011 1:00-2:30pm Mountain

There seems to be some confusion as to what Response to Intervention is and how teachers and schools can use this approach to help children. So, let’s start with some basics: RTI is not an action verb. You cannot RTI a student to support his or her learning and behavioral needs. RTI is not a place or a room in your school; you cannot send a student to the RTI room. So what exactly is RTI, then? RTI was added to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 2004 and became part of the nation’s approach to identifying and helping students who are struggling academically or behaviorally in school. It is a multi-tier approach to the early identification and support of students with learning and behavior needs. Struggling learners are provided with interventions at increasing levels of intensity to accelerate their rate of learning, and you, general education teachers, special educators, and specialists, provide th0se services.

Down syndrome, more commonly known as "trisomy 21" is very often accompanied by pathologies found in the general population: Alzheimer's disease, leukemia, or cardiac deficiency. In a study conducted by Professor Stylianos Antonarakis' group from the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Geneva (UNIGE), researchers have identified the genomic variations associated with trisomy 21, determining the risk of congenital heart disease in people with Down syndrome. The targeted and specific study of chromosome 21 revealed two genomic variations, which, in combination, are the hallmark of hereditary cardiac deficiency. These results are being published in the journal Genome Research and add to other research conducted by the same team about chronic myeloid leukemia, a severe form of leukemia that often affects people with Down syndrome. The journal Blood is publishing these advances in the understanding of a disease which, like hereditary cardiac deficiencies or early Alzheimer's, affects the general population.

In accordance with the requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),  the state must report annually to the public on the performance of each local educational agency located in the state on the targets in the State's Performance Plan. Because baseline data and/or performance targets have not been established for all of the performance indicators, the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), has informed states that they are only required to report district performance for students with disabilities on indicators 1-5 and 8-12 this year. These performance indicators address the following: Graduation, Dropout, Assessment, Suspension/Expulsion, Least Restrictive Environment (ages 6-21), Parent Involvement, Disproportionality As A Result Of Inappropriate Identification, Child Find Timelines, and Early Childhood Transition (transition from Part C to Part B). The district's performance data is 2008-2009 data that was submitted by the district to the OPI as a part of its child count, exiting, student discipline collections and/or collected during a compliance monitoring record review. Performance data for performance indicator #8, Parent Involvement, is based on parent survey data. The Parent Involvement Survey was distributed to districts that were compliance monitored in school year 2008-2009. Districts were asked to provide a copy of the survey to all parents of IDEA-eligible students receiving special education and related services through an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The District Public Reports can be found on the OPI Web site at:  http://data.opi.mt.gov/SPEDReporting/ .

President Barack Obama signed a three-year extension of the Combating Autism Act Friday, the very day the law — and many of the programs it established — was set to expire. The reauthorization Obama signed calls for $231 million annually through 2014 to fund everything from autism research to prevalence tracking, education, early identification and intervention programs.