here - SBS Documents

John Anthony Milliss delivered by 

Penny Robertson 

"Individual Education Planning Based on Student Strengths."...0185 

The diversity of abilities within classroom settings has created many challenges for 

today’s classroom teachers. The role of assessment and individualised program 

planning is evolving in order for all students to ‘ access education with reasonable 

accommodations or adjustments’ (Shaddock, Giorcelli, Smith, 2007, p3) in a truly 

inclusive environment. 

Traditionally assessment predominately dealt with what an individual is not able to do 

and reported as a deficit (Smith & Nevin, 2005, p 266) in order for a school to receive 

funding or support for individuals (Woods & Griffin, 2012,p2). Standardised and 

norm referenced assessments are useful in identifying students in need of specific 

services (Couzens, 2004, p.40), these assessments are not useful when writing a 

student's educational plan. 

Assessment is essentially a ‘ process of gathering and interpreting evidence to make 

judgments about student learning’ (DETACT, 2011, p.6). The collection of data 

through assessment enables us to determine the direction classroom planning is to 

take in order for students to achieve their educational goals. 

Assessment plays a vital role in inclusive program planning. A common thread that 

runs through research in this area is the notion that assessment should be used to 

discover a student’s strengths and entry points to accessing the curriculum (Callaghan, 

2003, p.3). 

Epstein (2000, p.249) states that 'strength based approaches to assessment focuses on 

the strengths, resources and competencies of a child and their family'. These strengths 

form the basis for setting goals in an educational plan. Educational plans that are 

strength-based will encourage greater involvement of students in their learning as well 

as their families within the educational process. 

This strength-based practice believes that we all have a wealth of capabilities to solve



problems as stated by Callaghan (2003, p.2). When we focus on what a student is able 

to do the chance of a student's success within the curriculum is greater. Therefore, 

schools need to move beyond results from normative assessments and more towards 

strength based assessment, as these forms of assessment will give us a greater 

understanding of the child’s strengths, skills, competencies and the student’s use of 

resources (Epstein, 2000, p249). 

There are numerous assessment strategies that can be utilized for inclusive program 

planning. Anecdotal records, conferences, contracts, peer evaluation, portfolios, 

student journals, simulations, student-led conferences and teacher observations are all 

forms of assessment (DETACT, 2011, p.11-12). Teachers should utilize various 

strategies to determine a student’s knowledge of the curriculum. 

When planning instruction for students the goal as Van Kraayenoord (2005, p.15) 

states is ‘to create contexts that enhance the learning of our students’. Teachers should 

know which learning styles their students prefer. Once this is known teachers can plan 

lessons reflective of their student's needs. 

The greatest step in moving towards strength-based practices is the further education 

of teachers. Schools need to develop a ‘whole school approach’ to strength-based 

practices. Teachers need to reframe their thoughts, to start thinking about students in a 

more positive way. When this occurs students will also start thinking differently about 

themselves as stated by Callaghan (2003, p.3). 

Assessments can reveal a variety of data that teachers and schools can utilise. Student 

strengths can be revealed through various assessments. Teachers need to identify these 

and use them as a basis for planning appropriate teaching strategies and also 

programs. Individual program planning can further promote the process of assessment 

for identification of student strengths.



Individual Program Planning – a collaborative process. 

The process of developing an Individualised Education Plan (IEP) involves a number 

of key stakeholders, (DEECD/DHS, 2012, p.2) and its role as Horrocks (2001, p.188) 

states ‘is to bring together key stake holders to negotiate the curriculum access and 

participation needs of the student’. The key stakeholders form a group known as the 

Student Support Group. The student support group consists of the following 

members: school principal, classroom teacher, student (where appropriate), parents of 

student and any external service providers (DEECD, 2012, p.2). 

Weisshar (2010, p.208) states that there are three components in the strength based 

IEP process: preparation, presentation and documentation. All three components 

involve key stakeholders working together collaboratively. Developing a strengthbased 

IEP creates ‘an attitude of fairness, a partnership and a greater perspective on 

how people and relationships are valued by the school’ (Weisshar, 2010, p.208). 

Parents play a vital role in the planning and implementation of an IEP. They bring to 

the IEP meeting a ‘holistic understanding of the child’ (DEECD/DHS, 2012, p.3). 

Parents are able to let educators know what works best with their child. This 

information would be collected in the preparation component of the IEP, the 

completion of questionnaires or through informal interviews. 

Once the IEP is implemented the role of the parent is still necessary. Many long and 

short-term goals can relate to the home. When parents are included in the 

implementation of strategies at home to achieve IEP goals, they are reinforcing the 

partnership and the collaboration process involved in planning. 

For an IEP to be successful, collaboration between key stakeholders is essential. 

Collaboration, as stated by the Ontario Ministry of Education (2004, p.E12), is 

'important to ensure that all members have a common understanding of the students 

strengths, interests and needs’. All members have their own perspective of the



student’s strengths, interests and needs. This information needs to be accessed so 

strategies and goals that are strength based are developed. 

Not all parents have positive attitudes towards IEP meetings. When meetings are 

based on strengths, parents are more positive about their involvement and will attend 

meetings regularly (Weisshar, 2010, p.210). Parents need to feel supported and feel 

that what they have to say is valued by the team. The Shaddock Report (2007, p.3) 

discusses the importance of collaborating ‘ with colleagues, parents and other students 

in assisting them to deliver a differentiated curriculum’. The process can become 

empowering for parents when they see the school working with them along with other 

professionals offering special services. 

Collaboration between mainstream and specialist support teachers is also an important 

part of creating an inclusive school community (Caterson, 2010, p.4). Members of the 

school community must effectively share information about individual students and 

value the importance of open communication in order to give ongoing support to 

students. 

Characteristics of a differentiated classroom 

Individualised Program Planning based on student strengths can enhance learning 

opportunities for all students. In today’s classroom, the role of the teacher is forever 

changing. The challenge for teachers is their ability to ‘differentiate instruction in 

response to the diversity of their student's, (Tomlinson, 1996, p.1). 

There are numerous characteristics that would enhance learning in a differentiated 

classroom. The first is that a positive school environment needs to be established 

where all members of the community feel supported by each other, accepted for their 

differences and valued on their strengths and contributions to the school community 

(Caterson, 2010, p.2). Once this environment is formed teachers will feel supported 

and will be able to remove ‘barriers to learning and participation in all aspects of 

school life’ for their student’s (Caterson, 2010, p.1).



For true inclusion to occur, teachers need to work on ways the curriculum can be 

adapted (Conway, 2005, p.119) to meet the needs for all students. Shaddock, Giorcelli 

and Smith (2007, p.13) believe that quality teaching and supported learning will occur 

in the presence of respectful tasks’ and scaffolding’. They believe that with the 

availability of these tasks in a classroom setting that limited adaptions would need to 

be necessary. Giangrecco (2007, p.36) also states that classrooms should operate with 

a multi level curriculum and where curriculum overlapping occurs. Scaffolding is an 

example of the multi-level curriculum and is a strategy that allows all students to 

access the curriculum. 

Teachers need to develop a learning profile of all of their students. These profiles will 

include preferred learning style, a child’s interests / strengths, what assistance or 

adjustments are needed to accommodate the individual in becoming successful. 

From these profiles, learning and interest groups can be created to promote 

cooperative learning and also where peer tutoring can be utilized (Arthur-Kelley, 

2005, p.185). Teachers need to see their class as a group of individuals with different 

learning styles and varying levels of knowledge. Once this occurs teachers can use 

this information to inform decisions on how to differentiate the curriculum. 

The classroom teacher is the main facilitator of change in a differentiated classroom. 

Once they are in the correct mindset and adaptive to change than differentiation of the 

curriculum will occur. Arthur Kelley (2005, p.168-169) identifies three interrelated 

themes in a supportive classroom environment. Issues in classroom management, 

classroom climate and the communication process need to be addressed if students are 

to learn in a rich environment. 

An important characteristic of any inclusive classroom is the classroom climate. 

Shaddock, Giorcelli and Smith (2007, p.11) state that teachers need to set positive 

standards for behaviour and ensure the tone of the class is supportive and affirming 

for all students. The physical environment may need to be adapted to facilitate greater 

access to the curriculum for some students.



The teacher should be aware of what support staff are available to utilise within the 

classroom. Support staff should not withdraw individuals from the class but be more 

of a support within the class setting. 

When these characteristics are in place, and all students are able to access the 

curriculum based on their strengths then differentiation will occur. As teachers are 

varying the ways their students demonstrate their knowledge, they also need to 

change the way in which assessment occurs. A differentiated classroom would allow 

for use of Curriculum Based Assessment where students are assessed frequently on 

their performance (Arthur-Kelley, 2005, p.176) related to direct objectives from the 

curriculum. 

For a differentiated classroom to be truly inclusive, the teacher needs to be well 

organised and plan effectively. They need to know their students strengths to help 

organise entry points to the curriculum, they need to feel supported by their 

colleagues along with access to continual personal development opportunities to 

broaden their knowledge and confidence in differentiation. 

The Individual Education Plan 

Creating an Individual Education Plan is a collaborative process that involves all key 

stakeholders (Horrocks, 2001, p.188). Once a student is identified as needing an IEP, 

a Student Support Group (SSG) needs to be formed. One of the aims of the SSG is to 

plan ‘reasonable adjustments for the student to access the curriculum’ (DEECD/DHS, 

2012, p.1). The IEP facilitates planning in a differentiated classroom and will aid the 

teacher in planning strength-based instruction.



References 

Arthur-Kelly, M 2005, 'Planning effective teaching strategies', in Foreman P., (Ed.) 

Inclusion in action, (3rd edition) Cengage Learning, Sydney, 2011 ch.5 

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace 

Relations 2007, Project to Improve the Learning Outcomes of Students with 

Disabilities in the Early, Middle and Post Compulsory Years of Schooling, retrieved 7 

March 2007, 

Callaghan, S 2003, Valuing children's strengths and capabilities', paper presented at 

Our Children of the Future Conference, Adelaide, Department of Education and 

Children's Services, Government of South Australia, retrieved 15 February 2007, 

. 

Caterson, K 2010, Catering for every student, every day, in every school – inclusive 

education. An online conference accessible from around the world, retrieved 02 April 

2012, http://pama.net.au/ocs/index.php/edu8719/10s2/paper/download/13/4 

Conway, RNF 2005, 'Adapting curriculum, teaching and learning strategies', in 

Foreman P., (Ed.) Inclusion in action, (3rd edition) Cengage Learning, Sydney, 

2011 ch.4. 

Couzens, D, Cuskelly, M, Jobling, A 2004, 'The Stanford Binet fourth edition and its 

use with individuals with Downs Syndrome: caution for clinicians', International 

Journal of Disability and Education, vol. 51, no. 1, Carfax Publishing, pp. 39–56. 

Department of Education & Training and Department of Human Services, n.d, 

Partnering Agreement: School attendance and engagement of children and young 

people in out of home care, retrieved 20 March 2012, 

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, 2012, Student Support 

Group Guidelines 2012, retrieved 20 March, 2012, 

Department of Education and Training Australian Capital Territory, 2011, Teachers 

guide to assessment, retrieved 13 April 2012, 

Epstein, M 2000, The behavioural and emotional rating scale: a strength-based 

approach to assessment, retrieved 3 April 2012,



Giangreco, M.F 2007 Extending Inclusive Opportunities: How can students with 

disabilities meaningfully participate in class if they work many levels below 

classroom peers? Educational leadership, February, retrieved 15 February 2011, 

 

Horrocks, L 2001, 'The evaluation of the Negotiated Curriculum Plan in South 

Australia', International Educational Journal, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 187–202. 

Medan, H, Sheldon, D.L, Appel, K, DeGrazia, R.L 2010, Developing a long-term 

vision: a road map for students’ futures, teaching exceptional children, retrieved 15 

February 2011, 

Ministry of Education Ontario 2004, Part E – The individual education Plan (IEP), 

retrieved 30 March 2012, 

Shaddock, A & Giorcelli, L & Smith, S 2007, Students with disabilities in mainstream 

classrooms; a resource for teachers, Commonwealth of Australia, retrieved 16 March 

2012, < http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/ 

D3113371-7E2C49FE80178495030736BF/19755/ 

InclusiveClassroomTeacherResourceFinal1.pdf> 

Smith, R. and Nevin, A., 2005 'Conceptualizing Liberatory Roles for Educational and 

Psychological Consultants: Implications for Transition Planning' in Journal of 

Educational and Psychological Consultation, 16(4), pp. 263-286 

Tomlinson, C 1995, Differentiating instruction for advanced learners in the mixed 

ability middle school classroom, ERIC Digest, retrieved 26 March 2012, http:// 

www.ericdigests.org/1996-3/mixed.html 

van Kraayenoord, C 2005, Special education, evidence based practices and policies: 

re-think? re-butt? re-make? respond, keynote lecture, Australian Association of 

Special Education National Conference, Brisbane, Australia. 

Weishaar, P 2010, Twelve ways to incorporate strengths-based planning into the IEP 

process, The Clearing House., retrieved 15 February 2011, 

Woods, K and Griffin, P., 2012 Teachers' Use of Developmental Assessment to 

Support Communication Proficiency for Students with Additional Needs, retrieved 15 

March 2012


Penny Robertson

here - SBS Documents

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?