School psychologists and IEP teams frequently navigate intricate evaluations in the complex world of special education. The following blog will share three important takeaways from my insightful discussion on navigating IEEs, specialized assessments, and the multiple disabilities eligibility classification.
Independent Educational Evaluations (IEEs) Must Be Educationally Relevant
Parents may request external evaluations, hoping it will change the course of their child’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). However, it’s important to clarify that while the IEP team must consider an IEE, they are not obligated to follow the recommendations in the report. This is particularly relevant when parents seek specialized evaluations that may not align with the educational focus of the school’s assessments. Ensuring that any evaluation requested is educationally relevant is crucial. Diagnoses from previous reports do not necessarily justify the need for new, externally funded evaluations if they do not directly impact the student’s educational needs.
Low Incidence Disabilities and Specialized Assessments
When working with students with low-incidence disabilities, such as hearing impairments, choosing the right assessment tool can be challenging. Many psychs prefer to use tools like the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test (UNIT) over others, like the Cognitive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence (C-TONI), due to its more comprehensive nature. However, it’s essential to tailor assessments to the individual student’s needs. For instance, while some districts may not have access to the UNIT, they may need to advocate for tools that offer better insights into nonverbal intelligence and other specific areas of need.
Multiple Disabilities Eligibility Classification
There is often confusion about how to properly classify students with multiple disabilities. The key factor in this determination is whether a program can adequately meet the student’s needs, particularly when they have more complex conditions, such as autism and blindness. It is important to remember that some districts misuse the “multiple disabilities” category by simply checking multiple eligibility boxes, rather than focusing on whether a specialized program is necessary. Furthermore, funding considerations come into play—marking a student with a low incidence disability, such as an orthopedic impairment or severe communication delays, ensures districts can access additional resources to support these students.
By keeping these considerations in mind, school psychologists and IEP teams can better navigate requests for evaluations, ensure the right assessments are used, and properly classify students with multiple or low incidence disabilities.
