Case Study: Stephen

 

Stephen is a seven-year-old boy with autism who receives most of his education in an inclusive first grade classroom. He speaks in one-and two-word utterances and can say “book,” “food,” “more,” “hi,” and “drink.” However, his main mode of communication is a picture-exchange system.
Although Stephen has demonstrated that he really enjoys group activities, he has lately begun biting his fellow students. In addition, he has begun pinching his teacher during one-on-one instruction. After he engages in one of these behaviors, he yells, “It hurts!” and starts laughing.
A behavior analyst has conducted a structured interview as part of a functional behavior assessment for Stephen. The teacher and parents’ responses indicate that the function of Stephen’s aggressive behaviors is to seek attention. Keeping this information in mind, the analyst needs to directly assess Stephen’s behavior.
Stephen’s general education teacher, Ms. Gonzales, has recorded data regarding the frequency of his behaviors, but with inconsistency as she is the only adult in the classroom. The special education teacher, Mr. Kuchar, has not been able to spend much time in the inclusion classroom to support Stephen and Ms. Gonzales and to observe Stephen’s behavior. Ms. Gonzales has requested a meeting with the Child Study Team to discuss the possibility of changing Stephen’s placement.
Ms. Gonzales frequently communicates with Stephen’s parents and has mentioned a possible placement change to them. Stephen’s parents do not want him to be pulled out of the inclusion classroom even though other students are being hurt. Currently, there are five other students in the inclusion classroom who receive special education services for behavior issues. Stephen’s behaviors are the most severe. Ms. Gonzales does not feel she can effectively meet Stephen’s needs with regards to his behaviors and keep the other students from being hurt.
Mr. Kuchar agrees that Stephen needs to be placed in a different classroom to better fit his needs; however, he has realized that there is inconsistent data collected thus far to support this need. The school principal also agrees with the suggestion of a placement change and has asked Mr. Kuchar to set up a meeting to discuss this with Stephen’s parents.

 

Detail the next steps to take regarding stakeholders that need to be involved in reviewing Stephen’s current LRE placement. Provide who specifically will be involved and describe their legal responsibility in the special education process.
Rationalize how your foundational knowledge of the special education process and issues within the case study led you to decide upon these next steps.
Identify and describe the ethical dilemma in providing Stephen an education that allows him to flourish, based on his case study. Discuss why moving LRE placements is not an option at this time due to the standard special education process.
Discuss how quality data and the lack of additional support in the classroom both play a factor in this decision.
Discuss how additional support in the classroom should be considered before a LRE placement is changed.
Discuss the possible involvement of paraeducators, tutors, volunteers, or related service providers. If paraeducators, tutors, or volunteers were brought into the classroom to assist Stephen, what guidance and direction would you provide to those stakeholders?
Discuss the legal, ethical, and quality requirements related to the management of confidential student information when working with paraeducators, tutors, or volunteers.
Support your findings by citing the “Special Education Professional Ethical Principles” and an additional 3-5 scholarly resources.

 

Sample Solution

Next Steps to Take Regarding Stakeholders

The following stakeholders need to be involved in reviewing Stephen’s current LRE placement:

  • Stephen’s parents: Stephen’s parents are his primary stakeholders and have the right to make decisions about his education. They need to be involved in all discussions about Stephen’s placement and need to agree to any changes.
  • Stephen’s general education teacher, Ms. Gonzales: Ms. Gonzales is Stephen’s primary teacher and is responsible for his education in the inclusive classroom. She has firsthand knowledge of Stephen’s behaviors and needs.
  • Stephen’s special education teacher, Mr. Kuchar: Mr. Kuchar is responsible for developing and implementing Stephen’s IEP. He has expertise in special education and can provide guidance on the best placement for Stephen.
  • The school principal: The school principal is responsible for making decisions about the placement of all students in the school. They need to be involved in the decision-making process for Stephen’s placement.

Legal Responsibilities of Stakeholders

  • Stephen’s parents: Stephen’s parents have the right to participate in all decisions about his education and to receive information about his progress. They also have the right to disagree with the school’s decisions and to request a due process hearing.
  • Stephen’s general education teacher, Ms. Gonzales: Ms. Gonzales is responsible for providing Stephen with a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). She is also responsible for maintaining confidentiality of Stephen’s student information.
  • Stephen’s special education teacher, Mr. Kuchar: Mr. Kuchar is responsible for developing and implementing Stephen’s IEP. He is also responsible for working with Ms. Gonzales to provide Stephen with a FAPE in the LRE.
  • The school principal: The school principal is responsible for making sure that all students in the school receive a FAPE in the LRE. They are also responsible for maintaining confidentiality of student information.

Foundational Knowledge of the Special Education Process and Issues Within the Case Study

My foundational knowledge of the special education process and issues within the case study led me to decide upon the following next steps:

  • Involve all stakeholders in the decision-making process: It is important to involve all stakeholders in the decision-making process for Stephen’s placement. This includes Stephen’s parents, Ms. Gonzales, Mr. Kuchar, and the school principal. All of these stakeholders have important information to contribute to the decision-making process.
  • Collect additional data on Stephen’s behaviors: It is important to collect additional data on Stephen’s behaviors to support the decision-making process. This data can be collected by Ms. Gonzales, Mr. Kuchar, or other school staff. The data should be collected in a variety of settings and should include information about the antecedents and consequences of Stephen’s behaviors.
  • Consider additional support in the classroom: Before changing Stephen’s placement, it is important to consider whether additional support can be provided in the classroom. This support may include a paraeducator, tutor, or volunteer. The support should be designed to help Stephen manage his behaviors and learn effectively in the inclusive classroom.

Ethical Dilemma

The ethical dilemma in providing Stephen an education that allows him to flourish is that his behaviors are harming other students. On the one hand, we want to make sure that Stephen receives the education he needs to succeed. On the other hand, we also need to protect the other students from harm.

Moving LRE Placements Not an Option at This Time

Moving Stephen’s LRE placement is not an option at this time due to the standard special education process. The standard special education process requires that schools make every effort to educate students in the LRE. This means that schools must provide students with the support they need to succeed in the inclusive classroom before moving them to a more restrictive placement.

Quality Data and Lack of Additional Support

Quality data and the lack of additional support in the classroom both play a factor in the decision of whether or not to move Stephen’s LRE placement. Quality data can help the team to understand the nature of Stephen’s behaviors and to develop an effective intervention plan. If the team does not have quality data, they will not be able to make informed decisions about Stephen’s placement.

The lack of additional support in the classroom is also a factor in the decision of whether or not to move Stephen’s placement. If Stephen is not receiving the support he needs in the classroom, he is more likely to engage in challenging behaviors.

Additional Support in the Classroom

Additional support in the classroom should be considered before changing Stephen’s LRE placement. This support may include a paraeducator, tutor, or volunteer. The support should be designed to help Stephen manage his behaviors and learn effectively in the inclusive classroom.

 

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.