Untitled Document

Deficits: A deficit in the IEP Game is a problem a child is experiencing. This category includes a range of deficit types listed as headlines on each card. Underneath the deficit type headline, different impacts caused by the deficit are listed. The impacts the deficit has upon the child's performance can also be understood as problems the deficit causes. For example, many students struggle with reading because of a reading deficit. Only some students have a problem identifying the sounds associated with letters.
The deficit is a reading deficit. The impact or problem is the inability to associate sounds with letters of the alphabet. Choose one deficit card at a time. Then, identify the applicable impact the deficit has upon the child. When all the deficits applicable to the student have been chosen, move on to the evidence category. Deficit types are based on research. The deficits included in the Volume 1, Number 1 IEP Game Training and Self-Advocacy Kit National Assortment are based upon common type deficits found in ADD/ADHD, mild Autism, Learning Disabilities, Speech and Language related disorders. Users will find a full reference list and discussion about each deficit type in the IEP Reference Guide.

Evidence: Evidence is observable events and documentary material that tend to prove or disprove a fact. In special education, as in law, all evidence is not created equal. Some types of evidence are more reliable than others and have more credibility in an IEP meeting. For example, A diagnosis by a medical doctor proving that the child indeed has ADHD is an "...authoritative opinion by one qualified to make it, concluding that ADD or a specific learning disability is present. Legally speaking that also establishes the existence of an impairment under the ADA..." (Americans with Disabilities Act).
A diagnosis is only one level of evidence. "An evaluation of impact demonstrates how the diagnosed impairment affects the individual...[and] recommendations may suggest strategies for the individuals and services or accommodations appropriate for the individual." In my experience on IEP teams, a variety of evidence is necessary to prove that both a deficit exists and support the claims of impact upon educational performance. Claims of existing deficits and their severity are most reliable and difficult to dispute when a variety of evidence either spans a long period of time or volumes of evidence are produced in a short period of time. Use the evidence cards to track and record the types of available evidence in a case. In the Evidence section of the IEP Reference Guide, you will find a table that has a reliability/credibility ranking for different types of evidence and suggestions on how to organize and prioritize evidence.

Experts: An expert is someone recognized as a reliable source of knowledge about the student. An expert's judgment is accorded some measure of authority and status by members of an IEP team or the judge in a due process hearing. Experts have prolonged or intense experience, practice or education in a particular field. Experts can validate: the existence of a deficit, the impact of that deficit upon the individual's ability to access the curriculum, validate the importance of specific types of evidence in assessing impacts, and recommend specific interventions. Experts cards can be used to judge the value of types of evidence and help ascertain the value of different types of interventions.
All experts are not created equal. Like evidence, some experts have more credible and reliable than others. A table ranking the general standards of credibility among doctors and professionals and a complete discussion of the reliability and validity of experts is included in the Experts section of the IEP Game Reference Guide.

Needs: The needs category represents what the student needs as a result of deficits. Needs can also be thought of as solutions to problems. One of the words used to describe the Deficit category is problem. If deficits can be understood as problems, Needs can be seen as solutions. Each student has a set of unique needs and this category addresses the most common methods for addressing those needs. For example, a fourth grade student with a reading deficit resulting in a first grade reading level needs something. That student surely needs a diagnostic assessment. That student might also need individual one-on-one remediation. In the IEP Game, both assessment and remediation are needs. The aforementioned example opens the door for debate.
There are many ways to address a student's deficits. During the training sessions, IEP Game administrators should lead a discussion of the different ways to meet a students needs. A discussion and references for each card will illuminate some popular debates on Needs and provide guidance in aligning needs with deficits. Match the appropriate Needs cards with associated deficits and evidence to make a case for intervention.

Rights: The Rights category contains cards that summarize the law regarding topics covered by Deficit and Needs cards. There are two types of Rights Cards: substantive (1-23) and procedural (24-34). Substantive rights are like entitlements and cover the "substance" of the topic; substance is subject to interpretation and debate (e.g. an entitlement is general; the particular form it takes is subject to debate). Procedural rights cover the rules of the IEP process and are less subject to debate.
Rights and law apply to every aspect of the IEP because it is a legal construction. During IEP Game training sessions, administrators should discuss how substantive law is interpreted and how the evidence of the deficit and its relationship to needs influences the interpretation of applicable rights. Procedural rights may come up as a topic for discussion during training as they pertain to the deficits and general IEP format. Use Rights cards to support claims of Deficits and Needs.

Footnotes

---Latham, P. and Latham D (1996). Page 64.

Guernsey, T. F. a. K., Kathe (1993). Special Education Law . Durham, Carolina Academic Press.