Search Results

This chapter reviews the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) reauthorization of 2004 that added RTI to the range of services and that supports school districts in developing innovative programs to address student academic and social/emotional problems prior to providing special education services. The three-tier process of RTI (and its implications for school social work practice), as well as a brief appraisal of the current evidence on RTI’s effectiveness in schools, are discussed.

There are three kinds of consultation that practitioners should seek prior to making an ethical decision. Ethical consultation occurs best as part of a regularly scheduled, on-going relationship aimed at the growth of the consultee. Clinical consultation is important to determine deficient clinical skills; help with complex client problems; find more effective interventions; support the practitioner threatened with job loss, malpractice suit, or revocation of licensure; and manage clinical concerns such as cultural sensitivity or developmental issues. Legal consultation is important when considering a breach in confidentiality, complying with a subpoena, or determining the legal rights of minors. Legal consultants should be knowledgeable about constitutional law; federal statutes such as FERPA, IDEA, and NCLB; state statutes, administrative regulations, and relevant case law. Finally, pupil services providers should know the guidelines for civil disobedience when ethical obligations and legal duties conflict.

This chapter explores the academic partnerships of the Imperial College of London with French universities. It first examines student exchanges and ‘study abroad’ programmes. It then discusses Imperial's partnerships with French institutions, including the Climate Knowledge and Innovation Community (Climate-KIC), the IDEA League, and League of European Research Universities. The chapter concludes by considering Imperial's future partnerships with France.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act’s (IDEA) free appropriate public education (FAPE) requirements compel school-based teams to develop Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) that meet the procedural and substantive requirements of the law. That is, IEP team members need a thorough understanding of the legal strictures that they must follow when developing a student’s IEP. This chapter examines how Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) can be used in developing, implementing, and monitoring students’ IEPs. It first considers the procedural and substantive aspects of IEP development. It then explains how CBM can be used when developing IEPs. It is argued that by using CBM as a basis to develop students’ IEPs, teachers and other members of the team can ensure that their IEPs are both educationally meaningful and legally sound. In fact, using CBM to develop students’ IEPs, monitor student progress, and react appropriately to the data, school-based teams will result in IEPs that are virtually legally unassailable.

Approximately 10–20% of students experience a mental health problem during their school-age years. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) assumes school-based mental health providers will serve these students in schools. The DSM-5 made five significant changes from previous editions. Enabling students with mental disorders to be eligible for school-based services requires familiarity with the assessment requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. School counseling can be provided using a multitiered system of supports ranging from universal prevention to intensive intervention. The best way to serve students is to collaborate with teachers, parents, community providers, and even school administrators. Finally, students’ progress toward general education goals should be monitored regularly so that they can graduate on time, become employed, and be engaged citizens.

Students who meet criteria for disruptive, impulse control, and conduct disorders generally present with a wide range of challenging behaviors that impede their ability to function appropriately at school and at home. Understanding the differential diagnosis and comorbid manifestations of these disorders—particularly the two most common disruptive disorders (i.e., oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder)—can assist school practitioners in addressing students’ behavior and socioemotional well-being in school. It is also important that school practitioners are knowledgeable about Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) categories for which students exhibiting the symptoms of these disorders are most likely to qualify for school-based services. This chapter provides resources to assist schools and school-based practitioners in implementing universal screening, progress monitoring, and rapid assessment of students, as well as evidence-based psychosocial interventions to meet the needs of students with disruptive, impulse control, and conduct disorders.

Since schools play an important role in addressing children’s mental illness and in giving necessary support to children, parents and caregivers have to understand their children’s rights and the laws and regulations that can protect children within school settings. Two federal laws mentioned in this chapter are the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which requires the educational system to give eligible children with disabilities the same opportunities as children without disabilities, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. Schools are required to accommodate children with disabilities to make sure they receive the same education and resources as their peers. In addition to these laws, school social work professionals working with children with mental health issues need to develop intervention plans that best meet the needs of each specific child. This chapter provides a list of relevant evidence-informed intervention strategies that social workers can refer to in their future practice.

Proposed changes to presidential term limits are almost always highly contested and have attracted international and regional attention. A central question that faces the external actors is the extent to which it is legitimate to take a position in presidential term limit debates. This chapter considers the policy concerning presidential term limits of three major IGOs, the UN, the AU, and the OAS. It further discusses the way in which IDEA, an IGO with a softer mandate, has responded to the debate on term limits, as well as the role of the Venice Commission, ECOWAS, DRI, the Carter Center, and the West African Civil Society Forum (WACSOF). This review suggests an increasing international consensus that, in countries with a history of authoritarianism and weak democratic institutions, presidential term limits can play an important role in strengthening democratic processes and reducing the likelihood of conflict.