FAPE is the least common denominator

On November 29, 1975, President Gerald Ford signed into law the The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA), or PL 94-142 (currently known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA). The EHA then, and IDEA now, guaranteed, among other things, a free appropriate public education to all children with disabilities in each state across the country.  Ensuring a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for all students with disabilities is the law but simply providing FAPE is the minimum.  

IDEA guarantees that each child with a disability, eligible for special education, will be entitled to a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

So let's define FAPE: 

• Free requires that the education of each child with a disability must be provided at public expense and at no cost to the child’s parents, except any  incidental fees normally charged to non-disabled students or their parents as part of the regular education program.
• Appropriate means that each child with a disability is entitled to an education that is “appropriate” for his or her needs. “Appropriate education” is determined on an individual basis, documented on the IEP, and may not be the same for each child with a disability.
• Public refers to the public school system. Children with disabilities, regardless of the nature or severity of their disabilities, have the same right to attend the public schools as their non-disabled peers. The public school system must educate students with disabilities, respond to their individual needs, and help them plan for their future.
• Education as described in IDEA includes special education and related services as directed by the child's Individualized Education Program (IEP), based on the child's individual needs.

That is pretty basic and frankly the words free and public are the only ones not open to a whole lot of interpretation. Education is pretty straight forward but it can be open to some interpretation. Appropriate, though, is a tough one. It really can be difficult to determine what is appropriate for each child and according to whose interpretation of appropriateness. One member of the IEP team may think that it is appropriate for a child with a disability to receive all of their services in the general education classroom with their same aged peers without disabilities while another member may think it is more appropriate for those services to delivered in a segregated setting.  Each team member will have their reasons why their interpretation of appropriate is accurate.  But to really make good, sound APPROPRIATE educational decisions, the team needs to rely on data and evidence!

Teams need to look at what is expected for all children at the grade level in which the child with a disability is enrolled, determine what skill and access gaps may exist for the that child, determine their specific needs and then determine what evidence-based interventions and instructional practices will best close those gaps. The team also needs to prioritize.  What will get the child the most bang for their buck? It is critical to choose interventions, strategies and practices that target the need and will accelerate the learning for that child in order to close the gap. 

Using evidence practices is important. The US Department of Education What Works Clearinghouse is a great place to start when determining which strategies, interventions and methods will be best to work to close achievement, behavioral or social emotional learning gaps. This site contains resources, practice guides, research and tools for educators to use based on the needs of students. 

Additionally teams need to decide who will deliver services and where they will be delivered.  Also for how long and with what frequency and intensity.  Again all of these decisions must be based on data and evidence. All too often we see seemingly random units of frequency and intensity on IEPs...30 minutes a week, 200 minutes a month. Teams need to consider the average rate of improvement based on skill instruction and then increase the intensity and frequency of the service enough that it will have an impact on closing the gap but not so much that it will take away from general instructional time or be too intense for the child. It is a fine balance but the bottom line is that it needs to based on data and evidence. 

Monitoring progress and collecting and analyzing data from classroom assessments is key to ensuring that the right interventions are being implemented at the right time and in the right amount. By analyzing student data and comparing it to norms or benchmarks for same aged and grade level peers, teams can determine the gap and then calculate the rate of improvement needed to close the gap in a reasonable timeframe to accelerate learning and, hopefully, get the student back on track. Without data and targets, intensity and frequency of specially designed supports and services for students with disabilities can become a shot in the dark. There is only so much time available to close gaps. If teams do not provide supports and services that ACCELERATE learning, they will never be successful. General educators and intervention specialists/special educators need to collaborate and co-plan in order to ensure that all students are receiving the right instruction to meet their needs and close the gaps. 

Remember that students with disabilities are general education students first.  They need to have access to and make progress in the general curriculum.  The supports and services they receive must be in addition to and connected to the core general curriculum that is available for ALL learners. Where, how and by whom the supports and services are provided is part of the least restrictive environment discussion.  Teams need to follow a decision making protocol to make these decisions.  It should never be based on the disability category of the student, nor the convenience of the educators. To the maximum extent possible, all children with disabilities should be educated alongside their peers without disabilities.  

Special education is not a place. Specially designed supports and services follow the student with a disability. I like the analogy of a backpack.  Think about all the "things" the student needs throughout the day as contained in a backpack that they can take with them to whatever environment is deemed appropriate for each activity in which the student engages.  Some things the student access themself, others will need to be provided by someone else. Sometimes, they may be happening in the general education setting, while other times a more restrictive setting is necessary.  Keep in mind that the location, service, and provider can change throughout the day. It all depends on the needs of the student. 

Within the language of FAPE, appropriate can be interpreted broadly but the bottom line is that the free appropriate public education that all students with disabilities are guaranteed through IDEA must allow access to the general curriculum, it must allow for progress to be made to close gaps, and it needs to accelerate learning.  Decisions about who, where, and how much as related to specially designed supports and services must be based on data and must be a team decision.