Dialogue With Donna

8/8/2019 Dialogue With Donna

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dialogue-with-donna 1/26

1



2



3



4



5



based on analysis of 2007 Annual Performance Reports

Strategies to improve Parent partnerships:

1. strong partnerships between PTI/community/parents groups = financialcommitments/collaboration

2. Mentoring and family supports especially for CLD

3. Supportive climate

4. Tangible evidence the school and district staff believed in the importance of

including parents/familes in decision-making & IEP meetings, Resources devoted to

developing family friendly/supportive school climate -multi languages/culti-cultural

approaches(p 97)

6



7



8



9



10



11



12



13



MIXED METHOD: QUALITATIVE/QUANTITAVE

Sample frame: The Arc of Northern Virginia

Population: 2006 database of 1600 members/friendsCensus sample of 136 families with youth ages 14-22 years by June 30, 2006N= 61;

Return rate of 45%

Use of finite population correction factor (.56) to define standard error of mean &

standard error of proportion

14



Individuals with intellectual disabilities desire a typical, quality life: inclusion, social

integration, normal social roles, autonomy

Distribution of knowledge, power, and control increases the likelihood of PSO thatlead to improved quality of adult life

Parents navigate between 3 processes to maintain well-being

Parent participation includes political processes to advocate for improved social

systems and services

15



16



Bureaucratic:For many -years of experience in navigating IDEANow new laws (ADA, community Medicaid waiver, wait lists, mandate vs. eligibility)

Teachers skepticism for SwID in achieving their PSO goalsProfessionals assessed skill levels seeking a fit between presumed and predefined skill setsand menu of programs offered as viable option Preselected options placed parents indilemma of selecting compromises that were significantly different from original request =confrontational communication patternsParents= high expectations/outcomes Staff= low (powerfully related to accomplishments inmultiple domains), based on visions for childrens future. Future full of promise=unrealisticdescribed in terms of discrepancies and limitationsDeficient people to be molded into situation-specific placements rather than as uniqueindividuals to be matched to employment through person-centered preferences.Visions did not always materialize--resigned to reality of what was currently available

Family:Single-parent households, poverty, least likely to be involved,School events luxury at too high a premium (out of district/travel/health)family stressors -health, social service systems constrain ability to participatefearful for adult childrens future safety, health, and QoL with their focus on meting basicneedsStatus:Parents perceptions of child as adult vs. life long child self-determined choices by child/adultParents as controlling wanting to improve situations that didnt need improving, ratedthemselves higher on life satisfaction than did their parentsParents difficulties in seeing child as adult when still required child-like care/needs, did not

make milestones -- normalization issues

17



18



19



20



Point 3-schools did not anticipate students with disabilities to make progress on the

same content standards as their grade-level general education peers; and therefore

that schools did not provide these students access to the contexts through whichthose standards were addressed

encompasses access to, involvement in, and progress on the general curriculum

The incorporation of context, content, high expectations, and accountability

measures supports the vision of students participating in and making progress on the

general curriculum.

21



22



23



24



NCLB= No Child Left Behind

IDEA= Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

SwID= Student with Intellectual Disabilities

25



26

Dialogue With Donna

Documents

Transcript of Dialogue With Donna