• Revised Agenda (Revised according to information received at IDEA 97 Planning Committee meeting on October 21.)

1. Introductions

2. Meeting schedule

3. Cost of subs for teachers

4. Letters to districts

5. Web page

6. Report from ULRC & Monitoring Staff meeting

7. Report from Planning Committee

8. Actions and minutes from last meeting

9. Clarify what we are doing

10. Review IEP law sections

11. Review Federal Regulations

12. Counterpoint article

13. Judy Schrag report

14. Flow chart of IEP law sections

15. Develop IEP purpose statement

16. Generate questions for OSEP

• Attendance

Morning Session: Randy Schelbe, Ronda Menlove, Marilyn Baird, Marie Larson, Harriet Dickerson, Tim McConnell, Mary Vaughn, Vickie Todd, Tom Burchett, Linda Summers, Ken Hennefer, Jeanette Misaka, Pam Hudson, Kirk Allen, Donna Suter.

Afternoon Session: Stevan Kukic, Mae Taylor-Sweeten, Ronda Menlove, Jill Weight, Marie Larson, Jeanette Misaka, Vickie Todd, Marilyn Baird, Tim McConnell, Brenda Broadbent, Randy Schelbe, Kirk Allen, Tom Burchett, Mary Vaughn, Harriet Dickerson, Donna Suter, Pam Hudson, Linda Simmons, two OSEP visitors (Chuck and Sheila), Bonnie Morgan, USOE general education curriculum specialist.

• Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

Co-chairs have decided that minutes will not be posted on the web page because discussion regarding items in the minutes is open and not final. Purpose statements and other pertinent information will be posted as they are finalized.

• Next Meeting Schedule

Next meetings are scheduled for: Friday, November 7 at USOE (room #65) from 9:30 am. to 4:00 pm and Friday, December 12 at the Salt Lake City District Office in the Board Room from 9:30 am to 4:00 pm.

• Action Steps/Assignments for Next Meeting

Reauthorization statue

New federal regulations (Copies on file at the ULRC and USOE.)

Judy Schrag report (Copies on file at the ULRC.)

Counterpoint, published by the National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Vol. 18, No. 1, Fall 1997. (Copies on file at the ULRC.)

The primary concern of the USOE staff at the moment is getting the state rules ready to distribute. Steve's main concern right now is getting the main purpose statements developed. Each task force needs to write one general purpose (e.g., What is the purpose of the IEP?) and then get right into writing the rules. All Task forces have struggled because of the waiting time for the regulations to come out. It was suggested that all chairs get together to make sure that within the committees all areas are covered making sure there is no duplication or omission. If two committees are going to cover the same item, they should meet together (e.g., prereferral and transferring rights of student at age 18 are covered by the IEP and also Procedural Task Forces).

We discussed the need for developing a protocol for the Planning Committee to review items from task forces.

We were reminded that we are part of a larger group of people divided into subcomponents- task forces. Someone will make decisions about the way the final product should read. It is dangerous to develop ownership for the things we are doing. We need to have open minds about the process and that we will not make the final statement about what the IEP purpose statement is. It is up to the task force to explain their position. It is important to take the committee through the thoughts, discussion, and ideas the taskforce had in developing the statements. With several members of the IEP task force on the Planning Committee, it is their duty to support what was developed and support one another. The Planning Committee wants to see everything that is developed.

Cost of subs for teachers: Letters have been also sent to districts for those people involved with all of the task forces letting their supervisors know about task force involvement.

Web Page: www.monitoring.sdl.usu.edu (Can access USOE/OSEP/ULRC from the web page.) Click on Utah and this will forward you to the IDEA 97 reauthorization with task force information. Steve has encouraged everyone to put all their information on the web page. If you have things you want put up, let Glenda know. Co-chairs have decided that minutes will not be posted because of the possibility of open discussion regarding items in the minutes. They will be posted after they are finalized.

All list serve addresses are up on the web page. Margaret will have these monitored and information pulled off. Ronda encouraged everyone to sign up and let others know about the listserves as well. Randy will contact Emily to see if she has written an article that can be published in the Special Education. Taskforces have been expanded from six to ten taskforces as of last Friday.

Report from ULRC & Monitoring staff: Web page and its purpose and the idea of what should go on it. Broaden the network of people who are involved in understanding IDEA 97. What should be going on it in terms of minutes and when they should go out. Agreement that agenda should go out and minutes after agreement within taskforce members. There is a form for all the task forces to use to record minutes.

IEP: Ronda discussed the model. There have been some great examples/nonexamples and checklist items discussed. Ronda has taken the model from last year and developed a note taking sheet. She wanted to know if the members felt this would be helpful to use during meetings to record information that is presented. All members felt this would be very useful and agreed to use them. Tom thought it would be good to modify it for the change in focus. This would be accomplished by inserting statements.

Ronda will put the statue and regulation together on the first page. It would be helpful for the task force to see these together. Ronda will also work on glossary terms. Ronda, Randy and Tom will work on the edits, then take them back to Planning Committee.

Vicki is concerned that general curriculum is not tied to core curriculum. Curriculum has been viewed as reading, science. Now it has changed to be viewed as being employable, good citizen, etc. Vickie was also concerned that teachers will use CORE as means to teach student. Will this happen in special education?

Tim: IEP should not be written in exclusion of the general curriculum. Larger documentation than Annual Goals and Objectives.

Donna: Life Skills Curriculum is foundation of the CORE curriculum.

Marilyn: Not limited to CORE curriculum. IEP is not to tell what the student is going to do, but where you want him to go.

Tom: What student needs that is related to school day. Bottom line is the IEP defines the FAPE.

Harriet: To move child forward in education. The Things we do are not always going to be measurable. Move student to independence. Drive "instruction" for student "accountability". Document for compliance?

• Items for Task Force Report to Planning Committee

The purpose of the individualized education program (IEP) is to describe the free, appropriate public education of a student with a disability receiving special education [and related services].

Present Levels of Educational Performance (PLEP) is intended to describe how the student's disability impacts participation and progress in the general curriculum. The statement serves as the foundation for writing the rest of the IEP and is used as the basis for developing appropriate annual goals and objectives/benchmarks for which special education and related services will be provided.

The revised statement will be taken back to the Planning Committee and reasons for the changes will be presented.

General Curriculum: The general curriculum is defined as the skills and concepts all students are expected to learn through instruction and activities of the school day. For example, sources of general curriculum can include: The USOE Life Skills framework, the USOE core curriculum, district-adopted curriculum, and age-appropriate development and activities for preschool-aged children.

[Change made in afternoon session. Brenda will look over the statement and add her ideas/changes.]

Developed an overall IEP purpose statement

Developed PLEP purpose statement

Developed goals/objective/benchmark statement

Began going through federal regulations and developing potential Utah Rules statements