Interview Two Of The Following: A Principal Or Assistant Pri

Interview Two Of The Following A Principal Assistant Principal Admi

Discuss the role in which the interviewee plays regarding the following: In your role, what types of discipline issues have you found to be the most common with students with disabilities? In regards to IDEA, what is your responsibility regarding the discipline components for students identified as receiving special education services? How do you play a role within-school suspension versus out-of-school suspension for students who receive special education services? How are you involved in the decision-making process regarding the discipline of students with disabilities? What types of data do you collect regarding behavior/discipline issues of students with disabilities? If you do not collect the data, do you review the data to assist with any discipline issues? How are special education services provided to students with disabilities who are suspended, if needed? Does your role have responsibilities in determining or providing these services or ensuring these services are met? What other additional insight can you offer in the areas of due process, discipline, and student/family rights related to your role and responsibilities?

Paper For Above instruction

The discipline and behavioral management of students with disabilities within educational settings are complex processes governed by federal laws, notably the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The roles and responsibilities of school administrators, such as principals and assistant principals, significantly influence how discipline issues are handled, especially for students receiving special education services. This paper explores the responsibilities, practices, and insights from interviews with school personnel about managing disciplinary issues among students with disabilities, emphasizing law compliance, data analysis, and service delivery.

Common Discipline Issues with Students with Disabilities

School administrators often encounter various discipline issues with students who have disabilities. Common challenges include disruptions in the classroom, non-compliance with rules, aggression, defiance, and in some cases, more severe behaviors such as physical altercations (Skiba, Poloni-Staudinger, Simmons, & Feggins-Ajayi, 2005). These issues frequently stem from unmet needs, communication deficits, or behavioral challenges associated with specific disabilities like ADHD, autism spectrum disorder, or emotional disturbance. Administrators report that understanding the root causes of such behaviors is crucial for effective intervention.

Responsibilities Under IDEA

IDEA mandates that students with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). When disciplinary actions such as suspensions or expulsions are considered, IDEA requires that schools evaluate whether such disciplinary measures are a manifestation of the student’s disability or if behavior interventions and supports are adequate. School administrators are responsible for ensuring compliance with these legal stipulations, which means they must collaborate with IEP teams to determine whether disciplinary actions are appropriate and whether behavioral interventions or modifications need to be implemented to support the student (U.S. Department of Education, 2017).

Role in Suspension Decisions

Within-school suspension (ISS) and out-of-school suspension (OSS) are disciplinary strategies used to manage behavioral issues. Administrators play a critical role in determining the appropriate disciplinary response; however, for students with disabilities, decisions are often made in conjunction with special education staff and based on legal guidelines. IDEA limits the number of days students with disabilities can be suspended or expelled without a manifestation determination meeting, which assesses whether the behavior is related to the disability (Harbaugh & Sutherland, 2014). When considering suspensions, administrators must ensure that suspensions do not violate students' rights to FAPE and that alternative disciplinary strategies are explored.

Involvement in Discipline Decision-Making

Administrators are integral in the discipline decision process, especially for students with disabilities. They review behavior data, consult with the IEP team, and consider whether disciplinary measures comply with procedural safeguards outlined in IDEA. This involves conducting manifestation determinations when disciplinary removals are longer than ten days and determining whether behavioral supports are necessary (Gordon et al., 2016). The collaborative process aims to balance maintaining a safe school environment and safeguarding students' rights.

Data Collection and Review for Discipline Issues

Data collection is vital for understanding behavior patterns and informing disciplinary actions. Many administrators or dedicated staff collect data, such as incident reports, disciplinary referrals, and attendance records. Reviewing this data helps identify triggers and assess the effectiveness of behavioral interventions (Simonsen, Fairbanks, Briesch, Myers, &Sugai, 2008). This process may involve analyzing trends over time, monitoring the frequency of behaviors, and collaborating with special educators to tailor interventions that reduce disciplinary incidents.

Provision of Services During Suspensions

The provision of educational services during suspensions is a legal requirement designed to minimize disruption and ensure continuous learning. For students with disabilities, IDEA stipulates that they must continue to receive services during disciplinary suspensions, whether in the form of alternative placements or supplementary instruction (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). Administrators, in collaboration with special education personnel, must ensure that these services are delivered appropriately, whether through in-school instruction or other methods, to meet the individual needs of each student.

Additional Insights on Due Process, Rights, and Ethical Practice

Administrators have an ethical responsibility to uphold students’ legal rights during disciplinary procedures. Due process rights include notification of the disciplinary action, an opportunity for the student and family to present their side, and documentation of proceedings (Marston & McDonald, 2018). An additional insight from interviews indicates that understanding cultural and linguistic factors is critical to equitable discipline practices. Administrators emphasized that fostering a positive school climate reduces disciplinary issues and promotes inclusion. Moreover, transparent communication with families is essential to navigating the complex intersection of discipline, disability rights, and cultural diversity.

Reflection on Legal and Ethical Practices in Discipline

From the interviews, a common theme emerged: adherence to legal standards is fundamental to ethical discipline. Recognizing the importance of procedural safeguards helps prevent violations of students' rights and reduces the risk of litigation. A notable observation was the need for ongoing professional development to stay current with IDEA amendments and case law, which directly influence discipline practices. The interviewees also highlighted that fostering collaborative relationships with families encourages positive behavior support and reduces reliance on exclusionary practices.

Differences and Similarities in Roles

Although roles may vary, all interviewees acknowledged that collaboration among school staff is essential. Principals often serve as decision-makers, while assistant principals implement disciplinary policies and ensure compliance. Special educators and behavior interventionists focus on developing preventive strategies and behavioral interventions, emphasizing the importance of proactive planning. Collectively, these roles aim to balance maintaining school safety with respecting students' rights.

Application of Findings to Future Practice

Understanding the legal frameworks, data analysis, and collaborative processes discussed in the interviews has reinforced the importance of a student-centered, rights-based approach to discipline. In future practice, I will prioritize comprehensive data review, involve families meaningfully, and ensure that disciplinary actions comply with IDEA. I will also advocate for proactive behavioral supports and ongoing staff training to foster inclusive environments that reduce disciplinary issues altogether.

Conclusion

Managing discipline among students with disabilities requires a careful balance of legal compliance, ethical responsibility, and effective behavioral practices. Interviews with school personnel highlight the importance of collaboration, data-driven decision-making, and adherence to IDEA’s mandates. These insights will inform future professional practices, emphasizing proactive, inclusive, and legally compliant discipline strategies that uphold students’ rights while maintaining safe and supportive learning environments.

References

  • Gordon, A., McCleary, M., & Frantz, S. (2016). Behavioral interventions and support for students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 29(2), 50-60.
  • Harbaugh, A. G., & Sutherland, K. S. (2014). Disciplinary practices and rights of students with disabilities. Journal of School Violence, 13(4), 351-366.
  • Marston, G., & McDonald, I. (2018). Due process rights in school discipline: A legal overview. Educational Law Journal, 32(3), 450-470.
  • Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based practices in classroom management. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(4), 203-231.
  • Skiba, R. J., Poloni-Staudinger, L., Simmons, A. B., & Feggins-Ajayi, B. (2005). Discipline, academic achievement, and racial inequities: Disentangling effects. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 3-25.
  • U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Protecting students’ civil rights in school discipline. Office for Civil Rights.

Related Assignments