The main function of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has always been to integrate the value of learning and development among special students within the educational curriculum. Recognizing the current trends and needs of students, the law was changed to address the functions of consolidating different measures to enhance approaches that bridges further effectiveness in carrying out its goals and objectives.
Reacting to its application within Georgia (GA), these new tenets diversified the value of integrating new laws and furthering opportunities that infused better means of facilitation, transmission, and redirection of necessary elements essential towards increased appreciation and learning.
One essential application of the amendment of the IDEA corresponds to the acquisition and training of highly qualified teachers.
Since the practice of inclusion of special students within the classroom requires the necessary skills and competence among educators, the application of standards coincide not only within the precept of IDEA but also on other educational mandates such as the No Child Left behind Policy (NCLB).
By ensuring that Georgian teachers are fit to meet the needs of students via training and development of necessary skills, they can help transcend towards furthering means to induce inclusion and determine the best programs available for students regardless of their physical and cognitive capacities (Hyatt, 2007).
Another crucial component shaping Georgia in adherence to the needs of facilitating inclusion and the needs of special students revolves around the procedural safeguards present within the state. Here, the board of education alongside educational institutions are the ones who ensure that careful application of protective mandates is given towards special students particularly in the realm of disciplining, mediation, and the process of intervention during specific cases.
Such directions can then induce better means for reinforcing accountability and responsibility among educators and administrators in congruence to the mandates provided by IDEA in reference to protective mechanism for the needs of special students and the promotion of inclusion (Hyatt, 2007). The third aspect that needs to be considered revolves around the nature of individualized education programs. Under the specific tenets advocated by the Georgian Board of Education, it has mandated and amended new conditions prior to the implementation of an IEP program.
Under these conditions, it must correspond to particular standards and approved by the supervisory committee handling specific subjects and disciplines. In here, modifications within the IDEA were introduced to carry out a wider span and target new means of consolidating a wider scope in trying to reach out towards the needs of special students particularly those with disabilities (Georgia Department of Education, 2009).
With regards to early intervention programs, specific attention is made by the Georgia Department of Education wherein they try to incorporate different schemes in reaching out towards special students and making them take part in government sponsored programs. In here, specific consideration is made the derivation of rubrics and EIP guidelines so as to guide both parents and educators about the appropriate model that is effective for each participant (Georgia Department of Education, 2009).
Alongside this process is the condition towards centering options to help students meet the demands of their grade level and adhere to the standards provided by IDEA. The last part circumvents with the process alignment with the No Child Left behind Policy. Under this mandate, the Georgia Department of Education has corresponded and integrated its school policies and its programs according to its mandates.
Here, amendments and rules were reinforced to guide educators and administrators the appropriate perspectives in helping students with disabilities become readily available and competent (Idea Partnership. org, 2007). Similarly, these conditions also center in areas such as special education services, school improvement, and addressing proficiency standards. All these conditions then necessitate better means to justify and outline congruence with both the differing perspectives and mandates provided by IDEA and NCLB.
In the end, it can be argued that the Georgia Department of Education has indeed consolidated efforts towards bridging and redefining the mandates of the IDEA. Here, they had sought to help induce inclusion within the classroom by consolidating the directives provided by the IDEA and applies them according to the norms prevalent within educational institutions. By reinforcing these policies, Georgia remains responsive and accountable to the increasing needs of special students and opens up opportunities for growth and development.