53
VIDBE-Q Volume 63 Issue 2
Assessment and curricula. Staff in both schools used modified versions of
EVALS from the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired. At one school, the
same tool was used by all staff, and in the other school, different teacher-made
adaptations were circulated by staff. Use of assessment data also varied widely for class
placement and directing instructional priorities within classes. In one school, a scope and
sequence for ECC instruction was in development by teachers and administrators, though
all parties reported the tremendous challenge of developing the comprehensive tool.
Creativity. In both schools, staff were actively developing innovative programs to
meet their students' ECC needs. In one school, a campus-wide initiative of weekly,
dedicated ECC classes for all students allowed students to learn specific ECC skills (e.g.,
lawn care, abacus use) to mastery. The residential staff in one school developed lesson
plans to guide purposeful inclusion of each student in after-school activities. One after-
school program allowed students to access homework help, socialize, and practice career
and independent living skills while they operated a coffee cart business. A student-
directed IEP initiative provided students with opportunities to engage in their own
educational processes and practice self-determination skills.
Both schools provided featured opportunities for paid, on-campus work. A
cafeteria work program provided opportunities for the students to develop specific job and
social skills. In one school, a full-service coffee shop provided employment for students
of all ability levels and allowed opportunities to practice independent living, career, social,
and academic skills. Administrators in both schools reported developing plans for
partnerships with local businesses to provide supported, paid employment in the
community.
