Identifying Problems in Growing and Applying 504 Plans and I. Electronic. P. Plans in South Carolina Schools to Ensure Appropriate...

Identifying problems and issues in producing and putting into action 504 Ideas and I. Elizabeth. P. Plans in Sc schools to make certain appropriate education for outstanding children.

December eleven, 2005


Special needs students had been identified by Parent/Student Promoters serving Horry, Georgetown and Anderson Areas in South Carolina with the drafted consent from the parents and students. When appropriate, the files made up of 504s and I. E. P. s (Individualized Education Plans), psychological assessments, doctors' studies, outside assessment by psychologist, neuro-psychologist, and also other professionals, were examined and reviewed for the purpose of this conventional paper. A holistic way of exploration was used to make sure that each scholar was seen in a reasonable manner. A lot of students were privately interviewed for their insight in the exploration process. Info from State and Federal Regulations and letters through the State Board of Education were examined and taken into account when compiling the studies. Individual differences in degrees of disabilities are factors that will be solved with every case study. The examination of genuine 504 Ideas and I. E. Ps allowed the problems being viewed as they actually exist. The goal is usually to identify and offer solutions to a few of the problems with the 504 and i also. E. P. process. Ameliorating the process of developing and implementing individualized education plans may improve the education received simply by special requires children.

Receiving a proper education is a crucial issue concerning parents and students throughout the nation, especially those dealing with learning disabilities. Problems concerning the correct development and implementation of individualized education learning programs, known as 504s and I. At the. Ps, must be identified and action taken to ensure almost all students the ideal education. The Accountability Action of 1998, Article one particular, General Procedures, states in Section 59-18-100:

" В…A conviction that large expectations for all students are vital parts for bettering academic achievement". This statement means that even students with special requires are to be placed to high expectation and academic success is the best goal. But , is that objective being recognized? For the purpose of this kind of paper, the info gathered will certainly concentrate on South Carolina, utilizing case studies in Horry State, Georgetown County, and Anderson County increase in used in combination with condition laws and other recognized government bodies in the field. It is a challenge to make sure that each scholar receives the correct education in the public and private sectors. This kind of paper is going to discuss how identifying problems in the development and rendering of 504s and I. At the. P. s in Sc schools can be resolved to make sure appropriate education for exceptional children. Summary of Individualized Education Plans

Section 504 of the rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects the rights of people with afflictions in applications and activities that obtain federal funds. Section 504 provides that: " Not any otherwise qualified individual using a disability inside the United StatesВ… shall, only by cause of his or her disability, be excluded from your participation in, be refused the benefits of, or be subjected to splendour under virtually any program or activity obtaining Federal monetary assistance" (Rehabilitation Act 1973, p. 56). The Section 504 rules requires a school district to provide a free appropriate education (FAPE) to each qualified person using a disability who will be in the institution district's jurisdiction, regardless of the character or intensity of the person's disability. Present student's having difficulty in school themes could be eligible for a 504 plan which usually does not require recognition of severe impairment. This plan is certainly not subsidized by the federal government. Institution districts are certainly not required to reply to the success or failure of 504 plans, except if a complaint is submitted to the state by the...

Bibliography: Accountability Act (1998), Document 1, General Provisions, Section 59-18-100.

Bateman, B. Deb., & Linden, M. A. (1998). Better IEPs: How to make15447 legally right

And educationally useful programs (3rd ed. )

Britton, T. (2004, October). Horry County University Letter of Response to W. Johnson.

Durant, Susan D., O. Farrenheit. E. M. South Carolina Point out Officials, U. S. Division

of Education, workplace of Special Education Programs Officials, & Office of Civil Legal rights Officials (March, 2004)

Essex, Nathan L. (1999). School Law and the Public Schools An acceptable Guide to get

Educational Leaders

Gonzalez, J. E., Nelson, M. R., Gutkin, T. B., & Shwery, C. T. (2004, Spring).

Harris, Dick. Forrest brook Elementary (2001, May). Individual Education Program.

Horry State Schools, (2004). Parents Directly to Know Pamphlet. Conway,

South Carolina: Horry County Colleges.

Johnson, Beckie. (September 18, 2004). Acquiring Educational Requirements Seriously,

parent care group, and resource team Director

Justice, Guy. Myrtle Beach Fundamental (2002, January/February). Individual Education


Jarvis, Larry. Pinot Grammar school (2002, April). Individual Education


Martin, Beam. Forrest stream Elementary (2004, April). Person Education Plan.

Policies and Procedures to get Programs for Students with Problems in Southern region

Carolina (2000).

Roe, David. St . Wayne Middle Institution I. At the. P. team (2000, Spring). Individual

Education Plan.

South Carolina State Board of Regulations (1999), Section R43-220.

Starin, S i9000., Ph. m. (2004, Fall). Wrightslaw: Functional behavioral tests: what, for what reason,

When, wherever and who also? Message published to http://www.wrightlaw.com/info/disciple.fab.starin.htm.

Smith, Jean. Waccamaw Elementary (2002, May). Individual Education Plan.

Us Department of Education (n. d. ). No Kid Left Behind Work, 2001. In ed. gov

(public legislation 107-110 2002, 115 stat