Part One:

As Ive been reading over Jareds* Individualized Education Program,

Im learning how comprehensive and thorough IEPs need to be. Putting
in the time to discuss and write these forms can be tedious, but it is
nonetheless legally required and important for designing classroom
instruction to meet the needs of each student.
Jareds school uses a software program (called TIENET; Technology for
Improving Education) to construct IEPs, so the final product cant be
submitted until each section has been completed. Therefore, it is
nearly impossible to omit any information required by law.
The goals and objectives for Jareds IEP are very well written. It
includes the required one academic goal and one functional goal, and
includes three other goals as well. His goals and objectives are in the
following areas of need:

Perception/Motor/Mobility (Fine Motor/Use of Technology)

Communication: Speech & Language (Functional

Communication)
Reading (Comprehension)
Mathematics (Math Calculation)
Writing (Functional Writing/Typing)

Each of the Short-Term Instructional Objectives/Benchmarks are

sequential reasonable within a year. They are appropriate for the
present level of achievement for the studentthey fit the program to
the kid, not the kid to the program (Michigan Department of
Education, p. 5). They are professionally written, well thought-out, and
follow the standard organizational structure of an IEP.
If I were responsible for teaching this child, I would find this IEP helpful.
Much of the information included would not be helpful for planning

instruction, but it would be helpful for filling out IEPs in the future and
for reporting progress to the state. The student strengths, PLAAFP, and
goals and objectives are the most practically understood and would be
the most helpful for characterizing Jared and his needs. That being
said, I wish there were more information included about his strengths.
When planning to teach him, I would want to include activities that
draw on his strengths and interests, but unfortunately that is the
smallest category in IEPs.
Part Two:
The process of writing IEPs requires the cooperation of several
school professionals, and subsequently a coordination of their time and
efforts. According to Ms. K, my cooperating teacher, this process can
differ greatly from one student to the next. Ms. K leads all IEP
meetings, and she is the one who writes them. Sometimes the
principal or social worker will lead them, but in this case, she likes to
be the one in control.
Ms. K articulates that in this school district almost all of the
students parents are professionals, implying that they are well
educated and highly involved in their students lives. As a result, they
like to be very involved in IEPTs and find value in voicing their opinions
and desires for the type of education that they believe their child
should receive. Parent input is a good thing, but sometimes it can be
overwhelming. In affluent areas such as this school district, parents are
sometimes too involved, often starting arguments during IEP meetings
and threatening to sue the school and/or teachers when they believe
their childs plan isnt being carried out in the manner they had legally
agreed on. Ms. K looks out for the best interest of all her students, but
the situation becomes frustrating when parents dont learn to trust her.

Writing IEPs is a lengthy process, but as a special education

teacher, Ms. K has gotten accustomed to writing them and the time
that it takes. When she first began writing them it took her much
longer, but now that it has become common practice to her, it goes
much more smoothly and efficiently. The process also goes quicker if
the school is already familiar with the student. For example, she is
currently writing an IEP for a student in her class, Emma*, that she had
in her classroom last year as a fifth grader, so it is easier for her to
think of proper goals and objectives. One thing that Ms. K says makes
the process lengthier is the refusal of parents to cooperate with the
rest of the IEPT. She informed me that she once had an IEP meeting
that lasted over six hours because this particular students parents
disputed nearly every suggestion and began insulting the character of
several members of the team.
As for the final product of the IEP, Ms. K says that they are
generally valued. The state values them, and teachers are now
required to report on their students progress on their IEP goals every
two weeks. Parents value them, although Ms. K agrees that much of
the information is not useful to them. She calls much of it mumbo
jumbo, and wishes she could give parents a simplified version of the
content that IEPs entail.
Ms. K doesnt use the IEPs much other than to report to the state,
but she also has a unique classroom situation where she has only four
students and knows them all well. In past years, especially when she
first started teaching in a CI classroom, she used them with more
frequency. She agrees that the Goals and Objectives section is the
most practical and useful for teaching and planning instruction.
Personal Reactions to Teacher Interview:

Many of Ms. Ks views on the process and end product of IEPs

resonated with me. As a not-yet teacher, the thought of writing IEPs is
intimidating to me. I know Im capable of writing the content, but the
process is an acquired skill. Its encouraging, however, to know that it
was something she struggled with at well when she first started
teaching in a CI classroom. Its reassuring to know that it comes as
second nature to her after some time of practice, and it also makes me
glad that Calvin is exposing us to IEPs before we encounter them in our
own classrooms someday.
Im impressed with the fluency in which Ms. K can navigate the
format of the IEP software. As she was scrolling through and giving me
a brief overview, she hardly had to look at the page.
I also appreciated the honesty in which she described her
experiences constructing IEPs with me. Its helpful when teachers dont
sugar coat the difficult and less-than-thrilling aspects of formal
education. Knowing that the process of forming IEPs holds the potential
for a lot of disagreement helps me know what to expect. I also admired
the way she spoke about this process; she acknowledged both the
good and the bad aspects and accepted that even though they arent a
perfect way to record students progress and the supports they will
receive through special education, it was part of the job and just
something you have to deal with as a teacher.