Alignment of Supplementary Aids and Services With Student Needs and Placement.
IEP teams give the same number of extra aids no matter the placement, and half of non-speaking students still get zero social-communication support.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Gross et al. (2021) looked at 150 IEPs of students with mixed disabilities. They counted how many supplementary aids each plan listed. They compared special-school plans with general-education plans.
The team also checked if students with behavior plans got more behavioral supports. They noted which students had complex communication needs.
What they found
The number of supplementary aids was the same in both placements. Students with behavior plans did get more behavioral supports. Yet over half of students who cannot speak had zero social-communication aids written into their IEPs.
In short, placement did not drive aid levels, but need still went unmet.
How this fits with other research
Pitts et al. (2019) shows one way to close the gap. Their UK special school added function-based behavior plans and daily ABA teaching. After one year, pupils gained skills in communication, play, and self-help. The study extends Gross et al. by proving the missing supports can be delivered and work.
Metsiou et al. (2011) seems to disagree. They found students with visual impairments in special schools had poorer daily living and social skills than peers in mainstream. This looks like a contradiction, but the two studies looked at different disabilities and outcomes. Gross counted aids on paper; Katerina measured real-life skills.
Pitchford et al. (2019) backs Gross with similar numbers. Their survey showed only one in six autistic students without intellectual disability received behavior plans or social-skills instruction. Both papers expose the same hole in actual services.
Why it matters
You cannot assume a student gets more help just because the IEP says "special school." Check every plan for the exact aids the learner needs, especially social-communication tools for non-speaking students. If the aids are missing, use Pitts et al. as your model: write in function-based behavior support, daily social instruction, and data review. Bring the list to the next IEP meeting and ask the team to add what is absent.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open each IEP on your caseload, find the social-communication aids line, and add at least one evidence-based support for any student labeled non-verbal or complex communication needs.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Trends in the supplementary aids and services (SAS) written in individualized education programs (IEPs) for students with significant disabilities (a) in different educational placements, (b) with and without behavior support plans (BSP), and (c) with and without complex communication needs (CCN) are examined using multivariate analysis of variance. Results show no significant differences in SAS for students across separate, resource, and inclusive placements. Students with BSPs had significantly more collaborative and behavior SAS than those without BSPs. Students with CCN had significantly more social-communication SAS than those whose IEPs indicated little to no communication support needs; however, 51.1% of students with CCN had no social-communication SAS. Findings raise concern around the extent to which SAS are considered before placement decisions, the high frequency of paraprofessional support for students with BSPs, and the low frequency of social-communication SAS written for students with CCN. Implications for policy, practice, and future research are provided.
Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2021 · doi:10.1352/1934-9556-59.3.187