Free TExES Special Education Specialist EC-12 (186) Study Guide

How to keep them straight: IDEA funds and prescribes special education. Section 504 and the ADA prohibit discrimination. ESSA holds schools accountable for outcomes. If the question involves an IEP, think IDEA. If it involves equal access without specialized instruction, think 504/ADA. If it involves statewide testing and accountability, think ESSA.

Other decisions worth recognizing on sight:

• PARC v. Pennsylvania (1972) and Mills v. Board of Education (1972): pre-IDEA cases establishing that children with disabilities cannot be excluded from public school. They built the pressure that produced the 1975 law.
• Irving ISD v. Tatro (1984): services a non-physician can provide (such as clean intermittent catheterization) are related services the school must supply, not excluded medical services.
• Honig v. Doe (1988): schools cannot unilaterally exclude a student for disability-related behavior; foundation of today's discipline protections.

⚠ COMMON TRAP: Rowley and Endrew F. answer the same question (how much benefit FAPE requires) at two different standards. If the option says "some educational benefit" or "basic floor of opportunity," that is Rowley. If it says "progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances" or "appropriately ambitious," that is Endrew F. Distractors swap the two phrasings.

On the Exam: Texas also uses noncategorical early childhood (NCEC) for children ages 3 to 5 with evidence of a disability who may be too young for a defensible categorical label. And remember the two-prong rule: a medical diagnosis (for example, ADHD or diabetes) never automatically produces IDEA eligibility. The ARD committee must find an educational need for specially designed instruction.

Populations Child Find must reach:

• Students enrolled in public schools, including those advancing from grade to grade
• Children in private schools and home schools within district boundaries
• Children experiencing homelessness, migrant children, and children who are wards of the state
• Infants and toddlers (birth to 3), referred to Early Childhood Intervention (ECI) in Texas

Your responsibilities as the special education teacher:

⚠ COMMON TRAP: "The student is passing, so we wait" and "finish the RTI cycle first" are both Child Find violations when a disability is suspected. Passing grades do not defeat the duty to evaluate, and RTI is never a lawful waiting room.

What they share: both require an evaluation before services, both provide FAPE (each law defines it), both protect against disability discrimination and improper discipline, and both carry procedural safeguards for parents. Every IDEA-eligible student is also protected by Section 504, but the reverse is not true.

On the Exam: A scenario student with diabetes who needs a health plan and testing breaks, but no specialized instruction, belongs under Section 504. A student whose dyslexia requires a structured literacy intervention needs an IEP. The dividing line is always the need for specially designed instruction.

⚠ COMMON TRAP: "Confidential" does not mean hidden from the teachers who implement the IEP. The opposite failure is also a violation: staff who serve the student must be given access to the IEP and informed of their specific responsibilities, and the folder must document that this happened.

Required IFSP components:

1. The child's present levels of physical, cognitive, communication, social-emotional, and adaptive development
2. The family's resources, priorities, and concerns related to the child's development
3. Measurable outcomes expected for the child and family, with criteria, procedures, and timelines
4. The specific early intervention services: frequency, intensity, and method of delivery
5. The natural environments (home, child care) where services will occur, with justification for any service not delivered there
6. Projected start dates and duration of services
7. The name of the service coordinator responsible for implementation and agency coordination
8. A transition plan for moving to Part B (school-based) services or other supports at age 3

Procedures with ECI (develop, implement, amend):

• Evaluation, assessment, and the initial IFSP meeting are completed within 45 days of referral to ECI
• The IFSP is reviewed at least every 6 months and evaluated fully at least annually; the family may request a review at any time
• Amendments are made with the family and the ECI team; services begin as soon as possible after written parent consent
• Transition at age 3: ECI notifies the school district, and a transition conference is held at least 90 days before the child's third birthday so an ARD committee can determine Part B eligibility and have an IEP in effect by age 3

• Develop: after the full individual evaluation (FIE), the ARD committee meets within 30 calendar days of the eligibility determination to write the initial IEP. Initial services require written parent consent. Note a critical upstream timeline: in Texas, the FIE itself must be completed within 45 school days of the district receiving written parental consent to evaluate — this is one of the most heavily tested timelines on the exam.
• Implement: the IEP is implemented as soon as possible after the ARD meeting; an IEP must be in effect at the beginning of each school year. Every responsible staff member is informed of their duties before implementation.
• Review: the ARD committee reviews the IEP at least annually; any member (including the parent) may request a meeting sooner. A reevaluation is considered at least every 3 years (the REED, review of existing evaluation data, decides whether new testing is needed).
• Amend: after the annual ARD, the parent and district may agree in writing to amend the IEP without a meeting. Amendments never substitute for the annual review, and the parent receives a copy of the amended IEP.
• Disagree: if the committee cannot reach consensus, Texas provides a 10-school-day recess to gather information and reconvene, after which the district issues prior written notice of its position. Parents keep all dispute options: mediation, state complaint, due process hearing.

The LRE continuum (least to most restrictive):

Placement decisions start at the least restrictive option with supports and move down the continuum only when the data show a student cannot receive FAPE there. Removal from general education occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability prevents satisfactory education in general classes even with supplementary aids and services.

Schedule audit checklist:

1. Pull the student's current class schedule and the IEP's schedule of services page side by side.
2. Confirm the instructional arrangement (the Texas setting code that drives reporting and funding) matches where the student actually sits.
3. Verify minutes match: every service's frequency, duration, and location appears in the real schedule, including related services like speech.
4. Confirm the student is with nondisabled peers to the full extent the IEP requires, including electives, lunch, and extracurriculars.
5. Check that in-class support and co-teach sections are actually staffed as written.
6. If the schedule and IEP conflict, the IEP wins: correct the schedule immediately or reconvene the ARD committee to change the IEP. The schedule is never changed for staffing convenience alone.

⚠ COMMON TRAP: LRE is not a place; it is a requirement that follows the individual student. "Our campus puts students with that disability in the resource room" reverses the analysis. Placement is decided by the ARD committee for one student at a time, after the goals and services are written, never by disability label or by what sections happen to exist.

Excusal: a required member may be excused only if the parent and district agree in writing, and, when the member's area is being discussed, the member submits written input before the meeting.

1. Introductions and purpose: members named, roles stated, procedural safeguards offered and explained
2. Review of evaluation data and PLAAFP: where the student is now, and eligibility confirmation when applicable
3. Progress on current goals (annual reviews)
4. New measurable annual goals drafted from PLAAFP needs
5. Services and supports: specially designed instruction, related services, accommodations and modifications, supports for staff
6. State and district assessment decisions
7. LRE and placement: discussed after goals and services, starting from general education
8. Transition (required by age 14 in Texas) and transfer of rights notice as age 18 approaches
9. Deliberations and consensus: agreements and disagreements recorded; mutual agreement sought; 10-school-day recess offered if the committee cannot agree
10. Closing: decisions summarized, prior written notice provided, copy of the IEP to the parent (in the parent's native language when needed)

On the Exam: placement order matters. Goals and services are decided before placement, and placement is decided by the committee, never by administrators in advance. An agenda that starts with "we've placed him in the self-contained unit" describes a predetermined placement, a procedural violation.

Required transition contents (updated annually once begun):

• Age-appropriate transition assessments covering training, education, employment, and, where appropriate, independent living skills
• Measurable postsecondary goals in those same areas, based on the assessments
• The transition services and courses of study needed to reach the goals (including CTE options)
• Student invitation to every ARD meeting where transition is discussed
• Outside agency invitation (for example, Texas Workforce Commission vocational rehabilitation) with parent or adult-student consent when an agency is likely to provide or pay for services

Transfer of rights at the age of majority (18):

• All IDEA rights (consent, notice, meeting participation, dispute resolution) transfer from parent to student unless a court has appointed a guardian or the student has executed an alternative such as a supported decision-making agreement or power of attorney
• The IEP must document, at least one year before the 18th birthday, that the student was informed of the coming transfer
• After transfer, parents still receive required notices, but the student signs consent and directs the ARD process

• Graduation is an ARD committee decision documented in the IEP, with parent participation.
• Every graduating student receives a summary of performance (SOP): academic achievement, functional performance, and recommendations for meeting postsecondary goals.
• A student who graduates under the ARD-determined conditions (other than aging out) and has not yet exceeded the eligibility age may return to school to resume services if the ARD committee determines services are needed; graduation under Route 1 ends eligibility.

⚠ COMMON TRAP: "Graduated" does not automatically mean "services ended" in Texas. Distractors treat every diploma as terminal. Under §89.1070, a student who graduated through an ARD-determined route may return and resume services through the eligibility age if needed; that return right is exactly what the rule's conditions protect.