Leadership and Policy
Leadership and Policy Competencies
Leadership and Policy Summary
When we think about special education leadership, our minds seamlessly think about principals and administrative staff enforcing school reformation, curriculum changes, policy updates, standardized testing protocols, etc,; however, leadership is not solely restricted to this group of individuals. Since school districts are largely wide-spread, leadership must appear in multiple forms to maintain the support system of all faculty and staff. Teacher leaders are a great example of this and take the shape of multiple forms: "team or organizational leaders, department heads, mentors, staff developers, peer coaches, and evaluators" (Billingsley 2007). When related to transition, educators, transition coordinators, and community agencies should be properly trained on transition including but not limited to: understanding the district, state, and federal transition requirements, understanding federal and state policies, acknowledging necessary transition program changes, and distributing transition resources.
Special education policy examines the local, state, and federal policies currently in place for individuals with disabilities. These policies discuss topics such as inclusivity and access to the general education curriculum, federal requirements that all individuals with disabilities should have in a school district, rights to receive an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). When associating these ideas with transition, transition requirements and policies are at the forefront along with evidence-based and research-based practices to improve transition (Kirby 2017). Transition coordinators, educators, and community agencies must collaborate on how to implement change in the transition program. This idea of change should begin with collecting and analyzing outcomes data for youth exiting school and on improving the transition program. The following artifacts demonstrate mastery of the above description as well as the competencies for leadership and policy.
Transition training for district professionals, transition coordinators, educators, and community agencies
While it is important to understand that all professionals within special education should receive training related to transition, this should not be limited solely to professionals in special education but also general education, community agencies, families, students, transition coordinators, and administrative staff. The reason is that all of these stakeholders are now transition team members and should receive the same training, resources, and knowledge as anyone directly in special education. According to Noonan et al. (2008), "11 key strategies that high performing districts implemented at the local level related to interagency collaboration, including flexible scheduling and staffing, follow-up after transition, administrative support, variety of funding sources, state-supported technical assistance, ability to build relationships, agency meetings with students and families, training students and families, joint training of school and agency staff, meetings with agency staff and transition councils, and dissemination of information to a broad audience. Research results indicated a clear need for a systematic approach to local community readiness and commitment of key stakeholders (i.e., special educators, transition coordinators, administrators, families, and agency staff)." Based on this study, we can assume that in order for transition competencies to be met successfully, all stakeholders should be actively involved. In more recent literature, Noonan et al. (2013) go further to state that "community transition teams must be formed with governance and administration components in place, including shared vision, shared leadership, and role alternation, neutral meeting space, and systems of communication." It is thoroughly restated that transition programs would be much more effective if all stakeholders were not only actively involved but had similar goals in mind to carry out and eventually improve the transition program. The following artifacts demonstrate competencies 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, and 8.6. The first two artifacts will demonstrate transition requirements and policies as regulated by the state of Georgia and the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The following two artifacts were acquired from a training I received from Glenna Osborne within my practice called TEACCH as well as another training by Emily Rubin called SEE-KS.
Click to Enlarge
Post-School Outcomes Data
Collecting data is a primary way to analyze the change and overall development of transition implementation. The data is a way to improve transition programs since data collection is an ongoing process. As stated by Marsh et al. (2006), "although there is no one solution for improving outcomes for students with disabilities, using data to analyze, identify, and solve problems within these contexts facilitates effective use of resources and is a powerful leverage for garnering support to build effective programming for students." Data collection is a necessary component to facilitate transition programs. When we start discussing post-school outcomes data, this is a type of outcomes data; however, it is simply the data regarding youth, with IEPs that are no longer attending secondary school. This document is known as Indicator 14, vastly different than indicator 13 that was demonstrated in domain 1. Indicator 14 is defined as "a requirement [that] states to report the “percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and were: A. Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school. B.Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high school. C. Enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school”. (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B)) The following artifacts demonstrate competencies 8.8, 8.9, and 8.10. The first artifact demonstrates knowledge of indicator 14 while the second artifact demonstrates effective use of evidence-based practices.
Click to Enlarge
Resources
-
Billingsley, B. S. (2007). Recognizing and Supporting the Critical Roles of Teachers in Special Education Leadership. Exceptionality : the Official Journal of the Division for Research of the Council for Exceptional Children, 15(3), 163–176.
-
Kirby, M. (2017). Implicit Assumptions in Special Education Policy: Promoting Full Inclusion for Students with Learning Disabilities. Child & Youth Care Forum, 46(2), 175–191.
-
Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making sense
of data driven decision making in education. Santa Monica,
CA: RAND Corporation. -
Noonan, P. M., Morningstar, M. E., & Gaumer Erickson, A. (2008).
Improving interagency collaboration: Effective strategies used by high-performing local districts and communities. Career
Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31, 132–143 -
Noonan, P. M., Erickson, A. G., & Morningstar, M. E. (2013). Effects of community transition teams on interagency collaboration for school and adult agency staff. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals,36(2), 96-104.