The madison social relationship inventory

Download 1.26 Mb.
Size1.26 Mb.
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18

Extra Hardships

Record extraordinary hardships being experienced during Time Segment # .

Are there reasonable courses of action that can be taken to alleviate at least some of the extra hardships experienced during Time Segment # ?


If "Yes," report the actions that may reduce at least some of the extra hardships and those who should take them.

Future Experiences
Have plans for future, or changes in existing, after school-weekend experiences during Time Segment # been developed?

If "Yes," report where the plans are located.

In the current IEP
In the most recent Multidisciplinary Team Report
In the most recent Individualized Transition Plan (ITP)
In the Individualized Family Support Plan (IFSP)
In the most recent Individualized Habilitation Plan (IHP)

If "No," report why such plans have not been developed.

Changes in existing experiences in the near future are not anticipated.
A plan is currently being developed.

Additional Information

Record additional information that should be considered in the process of determining whether the life of the student during Time Segment # is in reasonable accordance with the values presented.

Summary Judgment

After considering the information gathered, is it your summary judgment that the after school-weekend life of the student during time Segment # is in reasonable accordance with the values or is otherwise acceptable?

Summary Judgment Across Time Segments

After considering the social lives of the student across time segments, is it you judgment that each is in reasonable accordance with the values or is otherwise acceptable?


Record your judgment on the Social Relationship Summary Chart in the Summary and Preferences Section.

Regular Education Relationships

One of the many important reasons why a student with significant disabilities must function in Regular Education settings is so that meaningful social relationships with nondisabled classmates can be developed. Indeed, without the support of nondisabled peers, the success of students with severe disabilities in Regular Education settings will be severely restricted. In rare instances, the mere presence of a student is sufficient to allow the development of an array of important supportive relationships with nondisabled classmates. In most instances, however, merely functioning in a Regular Education setting is not sufficient. Responsible adults must engineer and nurture a decent social existence.

Before proceeding, two points are in order. First, it is assumed that the student is functioning in at least one Regular Education experience and that the IEP team is in the process developing a supportive companion relationship with a nondisabled peer; or that such a student is not functioning in a Regular Education setting, but plans for him/her to do so in the near future are operative. If the student does not have a Regular Education Supportive Companion, proceed to the Summary Across Regular Education Experiences on the last page of this component. Second, as acceptable supportive companion relationships cannot be developed independent of professionally sound educational experiences, a variety of factors critical for meaningful functioning in Regular Education settings must be addressed concurrently. Space does not permit a detailed exploration of the many important factors associated with acceptable functioning in Regular Education settings. Thus, users are encouraged to add those they judge appropriate, to study existing professional literature and to examine the manual entitled "Generating Regular Education Experiences for a Student with Significant Disabilities" (Brown et al, 1994).


Functioning in Regular Education settings is inherently valuable and a liberty that must be available to all students.

The Regular Education settings of today are the integrated religious services, shopping malls, parks, pools, "Y"s, workplaces and apartment complexes of tomorrow. Learning to function effectively in the former, enhances the probabilities of successful functioning in the latter.
The student should have access to the school, classrooms, classes and other Regular Education settings in which she/he would function if not disabled.
Functioning in Regular Education settings must result in the student realizing reasonable educational, social and other benefits.
Functioning in a Regular Education setting does not justify the provision of meaningless, patronizing, chronological age inappropriate or low priority educational and related services.
Much of the instruction provided in Regular Education settings is a means rather than an end. That is, much of what the student learns therein should be valuable for, and manifested in, other environments.
The presence of the student who is severely disabled in a Regular Education setting should enhance, rather than interfere with, the educational and social growth of nondisabled classmates.
If success in a Regular Education setting is to be realized, it will be necessary to modify or provide alternative to many of the experiences provided nondisabled students.
No more than two students with significant disabilities should be in a Regular Education setting, even if they would function therein if not disabled.
If success in a Regular Education setting is to be realized, at least one nondisabled schoolmate or classmate must function as a supportive companion.
A supportive companion relationship should not interfere with the academic functioning of the nondisabled participant.
The parents/guardians of supportive companions should approve of such relationships.
Supportive companion relationships with nondisabled classmates and schoolmates should not be a function of pressure, patronization, guilt, pity, etc.
Having the student proceed through an educational career without experiencing an array of supportive companion relationships with nondisabled schoolmates and classmates is untenable.
As supportive companion relationships are developed, the time, cost and direct services of professionals can be reduced without sacrificing educational quality. Supportive functions should not be provided by professionals, if they can be provided by peers.
During the transition years, ages 19-22, Regular Education supportive companions may not be as important as similar relationships with the nondisabled persons who function in the integrated nonschool environments the student will utilize after graduation.

Directory: ~lbrown -> wp-content -> uploads -> 2012

Share with your friends:
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18

The database is protected by copyright © 2020
send message

    Main page