That was then this is now

Take a moment to review the details of this assignment below and gather any necessary files. Once you're ready to submit your assignment, move on to Step 2.

Assessment Traits

Requires Lopeswrite

Assessment Description

It is important for the special educator leader to understand the history and reasoning behind the laws governing the discipline. This assignment will help you to synthesize your research on the history of special education law, evaluate how the history influenced the purpose and structure of IDEA, and consider possible needed updates and changes to IDEA in the upcoming reauthorization.

General Requirements: Use the following information to ensure the successful completion of the assignment:

· Refer to “Recommendations for Change Public Law 108-446: Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004).” This resource is available on the Internet. One possible link is: https://www.casecec.org/assets/IDEA%20Reauthorization%20Recommendations%20July%202017.pdf

· This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

· Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.

· Refer to Chapters 2-4 of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.) for specific guidelines related to doctoral-level writing. These chapters contain essential information on manuscript structure and content, clear and concise writing, and academic grammar and usage.

· This assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included.  

· You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Directions: Write a paper of 1,500-1,750 words in which you summarize the Council of Administrators of Special Education Recommendations for Change: Public Law 108-446. Evaluate the impact the proposal will have on the purpose and structure of IDEA. Do the following in your paper:  

1. Summarize the proposal.

2. Discuss the history of special education law as it pertains to current legislation and laws pertaining to special education.

3. Evaluate the positive and negative impacts of the proposed changes to IDEA.

4. Propose and support any alternative ideas the special education leader might consider.

step 22

Upload Files

Start by clicking Upload Files in the table below. Make sure to add all of the files required for your submission.

This assignment requires a Similarity Report.

You can request one within the table after uploading your files. Files submitted to your instructor without a Similarity Report will automatically receive one upon submission.

· Note: Once a Similarity Report is created for a file, it cannot be deleted.

step 33

Submit Assignment

Click the checkbox next to any files you would like to submit and click Submit Assignment to send them to your instructor.

Uploaded Files

UPLOAD FILES

File Name

Uploaded Date

Similarity Report

Actions

No files have been uploaded.

SUBMIT ASSIGNMENT

Rubric

Collapse All RubricCollapse All

collapse Summarize the Proposal assessment

Summarize the Proposal

31.5 points

Criteria Description

Summarize the Proposal

5. Target

31.5 points

The proposal summary is detailed and insightful.

4. Acceptable

28.04 points

The proposal summary is thorough. Research is from original sources; most are current, but some are outdated.

3. Approaching

25.52 points

The proposal summary is present, but done at a superficial level.

2. Insufficient

23.94 points

The proposal summary is present. Discussion is absent or inadequate.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The proposal summary is not present.

collapse Discuss the History of Special Education Law assessment

Discuss the History of Special Education Law

31.5 points

Criteria Description

Discuss the History of Special Education Law as It Pertains to Current Legislation and to Laws Pertaining to Due Process.

5. Target

31.5 points

A discussion of the history of special education law as it pertains to current legislation and to laws pertaining to due process is insightful and convincing. Argument is convincing.

4. Acceptable

28.04 points

A discussion of the history of special education law as it pertains to current legislation and to laws pertaining to due process is clearly presented. Argument supports claims.

3. Approaching

25.52 points

A discussion of the history of special education law as it pertains to current legislation and to laws pertaining to due process is present, but done at a cursory level.

2. Insufficient

23.94 points

A discussion of the history of special education law as it pertains to current legislation and to laws pertaining to due process is present. Argument and/or discussion are absent or inadequate.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the history of special education law as it pertains to current legislation and to laws pertaining to due process is not present.

collapse Evaluate the Impact of Eliminating Due Process Hearings on the Current Structure of IDEA. assessment

Evaluate the Impact of Eliminating Due Process Hearings on the Current Structure of IDEA.

31.5 points

Criteria Description

Evaluate the Impact of Eliminating Due Process Hearings on the Current Structure of IDEA.

5. Target

31.5 points

An evaluation of the impact of eliminating due process hearings on the current structure of IDEA is clearly presented. Discussion is thorough and insightful. Research is from scholarly and current sources.

4. Acceptable

28.04 points

An evaluation of the impact of eliminating due process hearings on the current structure of IDEA is clearly presented. Discussion is convincing. Research is from original sources; most are authoritative, but some are outdated.

3. Approaching

25.52 points

An evaluation of the impact of eliminating due process hearings on the current structure of IDEA is present, but done at a cursory level.

2. Insufficient

23.94 points

An evaluation of the impact of eliminating due process hearings on the current structure of IDEA is present. Discussion is absent or inadequate.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An evaluation of the impact of eliminating due process hearings on the current structure of IDEA is not presented.

collapse Propose any Alternative Ideas the Special Education Leader Might Consider. assessment

Propose any Alternative Ideas the Special Education Leader Might Consider.

31.5 points

Criteria Description

Propose any Alternative Ideas the Special Education Leader Might Consider.

5. Target

31.5 points

A proposal of an alternative idea is clearly presented. Argument supports claims and is insightful. Research is from original, current sources.

4. Acceptable

28.04 points

A proposal of an alternative idea is clearly presented. Argument is thorough and convincing. Research is from original sources; most are authoritative, but some are outdated.

3. Approaching

25.52 points

A proposal of an alternative idea is present, but done at a superficial level.

2. Insufficient

23.94 points

A proposal of an alternative idea is present, but incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A proposal of an alternative idea is not present.

collapse Synthesis and Argument assessment

Synthesis and Argument

21 points

Criteria Description

Synthesis and Argument

5. Target

21 points

Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. The synthesis and argument in the paper are of publication caliber.

4. Acceptable

18.69 points

Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. Approaching

17.01 points

Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. Insufficient

15.96 points

Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources.

collapse Thesis Development and Purpose assessment

Thesis Development and Purpose

42 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. Target

42 points

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. The development indicated by the thesis and/or main claim is acceptable for publication.

4. Acceptable

37.38 points

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. Approaching

34.02 points

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. Insufficient

31.92 points

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

collapse Mechanics of Writing assessment

Mechanics of Writing

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing

5. Target

10.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Acceptable

9.35 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. Approaching

8.51 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. Insufficient

7.98 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

collapse APA Format assessment

APA Format

10.5 points

Criteria Description

APA Format

5. Target

10.5 points

The document is correctly formatted to publication standards. All research presented is scholarly, topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. The paper could readily be accepted for publication.

4. Acceptable

9.35 points

Required format is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. Scholarly research accounts for the majority of sources presented and is topic-related and obtained from reputable professional sources. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

3. Approaching

8.51 points

Required format is used correctly, although some minor errors may be present. Scholarly research sources are present and topic-related, but the source and quality of some references is questionable. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

2. Insufficient

7.98 points

Required format is attempted, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Some included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Required format is rarely followed correctly. An appropriate number of topic-related scholarly research sources and related in-text citations is not present. No reference page is included. No citations are used.