Cover Story
Taming the Paper Tiger

Less paperwork. That was one prime goal of IDEA '97, the revision of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that Congress enacted three years ago. But--in far too many schools across the United States--NEA members are reporting that this goal simply has not been met. Why haven't the new federal special ed reforms reduced, at least so far, the amount of paperwork that educators are required to generate for special needs students?

The problem often sits in school district central offices.

Wary of litigation and confused by conflicting interpretations of special ed regulations, many local school officials are insisting that educators document, document, document--even in situations where no federal statutes require that documentation.

The result? Overburdened staff. Individualized Education Programs--those all-important IEPs--that can run several dozen pages. Students and parents whose needs can get lost in the paperwork shuffle.

Does this all mean that you're doomed to spend the rest of your career neck-deep in paperwork that frustrates you--without appreciably helping kids?

The encouraging answer, NEA Today interviews with innovative educators all over the nation make clear, is definitely not.

In states from Connecticut to Califor-nia, NEA members and affiliates are taking advantage of the changes in federal law that NEA helped pass back in 1997 to cut paperwork and help students learn.

Sometimes, says Patti Ralabate, an activist in NEA's Caucus for Exceptional Children, the best approach to reducing paperwork may be going straight to the top--in Washington, D.C.

The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs, Ralabate points out, will review paperwork submitted by any state to determine whether that paperwork is too burdensome.

"One IEP package that was sent in was 43 pages long," notes this speech-language pathologist from Danbury, Connecticut. "The educators were told that most of what they were documenting was unnecessary under the new federal law."

Sometimes, add NEA activists in Florida, action at the local bargaining level can help cut paperwork down to manageable size.

The Pinellas Classroom Teachers Association, for instance, has successfully bargained for standardized IEPs as well as release time and compensation for additional work.

Other NEA members have been working at the state level. Association activists in Oregon have helped enact legislation that will develop an IEP form that's standardized for statewide use.

And North Carolina educators are now awaiting the impact of a recently passed "Reduction of Paperwork in Public Schools" bill. This legislation aims to give educators in the state the right to refuse to provide data they've already provided elsewhere.

"In Michigan, the focus has been on trying to support all personnel who work with special ed children," adds Tom Ferris, a UniServ director in Lansing who has developed prototype contract language that advocates for support staff and teachers involved in the IEP process.

Last year, the Michigan Education Association presented the state board of ed a "Discussion Paper on Bargaining Special Education" that discusses a variety of special ed concerns, including paperwork.

In many districts across America, NEA members are joining with local administrators to streamline the paperwork process.

"My school district is using computerized forms," says Carol Comparsi, a secondary teacher in Anaheim, California. "Through a special ed task force of administrators and teachers, we were also able to get additional clerical assistance--aides getting extra work hours--for tracking paperwork."

In Washington State schools, says Julie Moore, a Central Kitsap junior high teacher, IEP forms are posted on the Web and approved for all districts to use.

"At the district level, we have a networked system that can create a paperless IEP," Moore points out. "All individuals working with a student can submit information, via computer, from anywhere in the district."

In other districts, NEA members and local school officials are trying to creatively compensate staff for time spent both planning and preparing IEPs and participating in team meetings. Some districts have hired full-time substitutes to cover classrooms for teachers in IEP meetings.

Districts are also investing in Internet-based systems that help teachers write IEPs and track workflow. Some commercially available programs allow educators to add to an IEP document, make printouts to share with parents, even generate a final report in English or Spanish.

In Iowa, the NEA state affiliate has used the state's unique fiber optic network to produce a distance learning forum that linked hundreds of special and general ed teachers.

This Iowa State Education Association event "reached a lot of people in rural areas who had no one to answer questions," says Jackie Wellborn, an eighth grade resource teacher who writes more than 30 IEPs a year.

Iowa educators have also developed electronic templates that prompt the user for information and use existing databases to "plug and play" key documents already on file into an IEP.

Shortcuts like these can save time and help eliminate unnecessary paper.

"But the last thing we ever want to do," stresses Iowa's Wellborn, "is shortchange our kids."

Michigan UniServ director Tom Ferris, the father of a teenage son with multiple impairments, agrees. To ensure kids the personal attention they need--and save time--he advises educators to share IEP drafts with parents before an IEP meeting, so that parents can come prepared to discuss options.

"You don't show up to the IEP meeting with a baked cake and ask parents to eat it," explains Ferris.

As a parent of a child with special needs, a veteran teacher, and a UniServ director, Ferris brings a special perspective to special education. Everyone involved in the process, he believes, needs to see beyond paperwork--and look to the special needs of every child.

"As a parent, what I want most for my child is an education that will help him do his best after school is over," he says. "To get to that goal, I've got to work with educators, and they've got to work with me."

Sums up Ferris: "We're a team."

--Michelle Y. Green

Managing Paperwork

"I can teach or I can do paperwork. Which do you want?"

That's the all-too-common lament heard in schools across the country whenever the discussion turns to special education.

Yet, in some schools, frustrations around paperwork have significantly dropped since the 1997 reforming of the key federal legislation on special ed, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Are educators in your school able to use that act in the right way--or are they laboring under misconceptions about their paperwork responsibilities?

The New IDEA Survival Guide, just published by the NEA Professional Library, zeroes in on many of the most widespread misunderstandings about what IDEA '97 does and does not require.

• Advance Planning. Many educators believe they can't discuss or do paperwork for an IEP ahead of an IEP meeting. Not true! Teachers can meet to discuss and even devise a draft IEP, as long as they don't make final decisions. Teachers can also share a draft IEP with the student's parents, as long as they present it as an option.

• Writing Goals. Some teachers believe they have to write a goal for every single class a special ed student is taking. Not true! You only have to write goals for needs areas. If a student's difficulties are only in reading, you don't need to write math goals. Or if a student has behavioral problems, it may not be necessary to write academic objectives.

• Retesting Students. A student reevaluation is indeed required every three years, but retesting may not be necessary. An IEP team may review existing data--including evaluations, information provided by parents, classroom-based assessments, and the observations of teachers and related service providers--before determining whether any additional data is needed.

• IEP Meetings. Does your school hold too many IEP meetings? The minimum required for a student is one a year. You don't need to hold an IEP meeting unless you're changing a student's placement, the program goals, or the services that are provided --or unless the local district or parents request a meeting.

• Transition Planning and Services. The services a student will need to transition into adulthood must be addressed in an IEP when a student hits a certain age. But it's not necessary to prepare a separate transition document.

• Behavioral Intervention Plans. Some teachers believe that every IEP requires a behavioral component. This is true only if the student's disability causes behavior that impedes the student's learning or the learning of other students.

Download The New IDEA Survival Guide from the Web at www.nea.org/books. Copies of this new NEA Professional Library book ($5.95 NEA members, $6.95 non-members) can also be ordered at this site or by calling 1-800-229-4200 (ask for item #2016-2-00-F).

Q & A
People, Not Paperwork

Sharon Schultz is an instructor in the Department of Special Education at Ball State University in Indiana. A staff development consultant, she provides technical assistance to schools implementing IDEA.

Why so much paperwork?
Over the years there's been litigation. And it's been emphasized, "document, document, document." Pages of paperwork have been added to cover issues at the local or state level. Local districts have added things because the state has come in for review and said, "I don't see documentation for this." A colleague tells me her school's IEP has 33 pages. In fact, if you look at the federal component, an IEP can be distilled into a four- or five-page form.

Like the Department of Education's model IEP?
Yes, and many states have developed their own. Indiana allows you to prepare a Case Conference Committee Report, a summary of the team meeting that lists the components of the IEP. Present levels of performance, goals, and objectives can be easily copied and referenced for all staff members working with that child. Other information, such as disability categories, do not have to be forwarded at all. The focus is on the services.

Are there other strategies?
People tend to make lists and lists, then go through and check them off. If you come to an IEP meeting with the purpose of looking individually at the student and talking about the services the student needs without the checklist, you actually have a lot less paper. We're so focused on everything that has to be documented that we lose focus on the child.

The purpose of the team meeting is to brainstorm about what services the child needs to progress in the general ed curriculum. If we start making connections to the curriculum and standards-based learning, I truly believe our need to write and write and write can actually be lessened.

How can educators get that message across?
Talk to coordinators about what's useful and what's not. Find out what portions have meaning for educators, for students, and for parents. And if we find things that just aren't working, let's talk about it. I hope we can collaborate to create meaningful IEPs that will cause us to act in the best interests of the child. When we develop a higher level of trust, we won't feel compelled to put everything in writing.

For more: schultzsr@home.com