TechinAction Engaging Families from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds in Virtual Individualized Education Program Meetings Journal of Special Education Technology 2023, Vol. 0(0) 1–10 © The Author(s) 2023 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/01626434231184883 journals.sagepub.com/home/jst Danielle M. Feeney1 , Carlos E. Lavı́n2 , Monique Matute-Chavarria3 , Haerin Park4, and Yun-Ju Hsiao5 Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted education in a multitude of ways. During this time, school districts struggled to provide students with disabilities access to services and supports under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). School personnel were required to continue holding meetings to review students’ Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) yet did not always have the resources and skills to do so. The increased digital divide between culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families and their White counterparts posed additional challenges for them, such as access to technology and lack of experience with various technology tools. Although this expedited the need for culturally responsive virtual IEP meetings, this option should continue to be provided outside of pandemic contexts. Therefore, it is critical for teachers to facilitate virtual IEP meetings creating spaces where CLD families can participate as equal partners. Utilizing the tenets of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP) can help this endeavor. This article explains several recommendations for teachers and school personnel to create identityhonoring, culturally responsive IEP meetings in virtual spaces. Keywords individualized education programs, technology, cultural relevance Mr James, a kindergarten teacher, is preparing for the upcoming Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting of one of his students. The student, Min, was born in South Korea and is eligible for services and supports under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) with the eligibility of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). When Min’s parents learned that he had ASD, they decided to immigrate to the United States so Min could receive special education services without the negative perceptions of their son in Korean schools and society. Mr James has reached out to Min’s parents to begin scheduling the meeting and learned that an online option would be best for them. Mr James has not facilitated an IEP meeting online before, so he is considering what he needs to do in order for it to be effective. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, school districts across the country were required to rethink the logistics of the Individual Education Program (IEP) process. Although this was not the initial reason for facilitating IEP meetings online, it mandated that schools offer virtual services more consistently (Markelz & Nagro, 2022). For the 14% of students in public schools being served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004; Hussar et al., 2020), schools needed to continue providing free and appropriate public education (FAPE). Regardless of schools’ moral, legal, and ethical responsibility to develop and implement highquality IEPs, this shift posed several barriers (Markelz & Nagro, 2022). One notable consideration for moving IDEA-compliant IEP meetings to virtual settings is access to technology. School personnel, students, families and caregivers, related service providers, and community stakeholders who participate in the IEP meeting require access. Although various devices (e.g., cell phones, computers, tablets) and virtual platforms (e.g., Zoom, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams) are available, several come at a cost. All participants must be able to access these resources; without the knowledge, budget, 1 Teacher Education, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, USA 3 School of Teacher Preparation, Administration, and Leadership, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, USA 4 Department of Education, University of Saint Joseph, West Hartford, CT, USA 5 Washington State University-Tri-Cities, Richland, WA, USA 2 Corresponding Author: Danielle M. Feeney, Teacher Education, Ohio University, 100 E Union St, Athens, OH 45701, USA. Email: feeneyd@ohio.edu 2 skills, and related tools for all team members to obtain and use a specified electronic resource, a successful virtual meeting cannot be held. In circumstances where all IEP team members have access to and can use the necessary tools to hold the virtual meeting, scheduling can still pose problems. Legal mandates under IDEA require that schools attempt to ensure full and equal caregiver participation in IEP meetings (IDEA, 2004; Yell et al., 2020). This means that school personnel must schedule meetings in mutually agreed-upon contexts and with adequate notice. Similarly, school personnel must inform the families or caregivers of the meeting’s purpose, time, and place. When doing so, schools must also share who will attend by district request and the parents’ rights to bring others to the meeting (IDEA, 2004). While having the option to meet virtually may provide additional scheduling opportunities, it can also add difficulties. School personnel must consider confidentiality when scheduling, preparing, and holding meetings (Yell et al., 2020). It is crucial for the meeting to be held in contexts where all participants have access to the needed tools and can attend from secure, confidential locations. This also requires all participants to consider and be cognizant of distractions, interruptions, and potential issues that may arise within their setting. One additional consideration is the importance of accessibility during meetings. While equally important during inperson meetings, creating accessible arrangements in virtual spaces requires different skills. For various accessibility features to be provided (e.g., captioning, multi-spotlight, dark mode), IEP team members may need to be trained on how to enable or use them. Since different e-platforms have various accessibility features and processes (Google, 2022; Microsoft, 2022; Zoom Video Communications, 2022), this needs to be considered during the planning and implementation of the meeting. If team members are not experienced with the features on a specific platform, have an unease with technology, or lack access to technology, it could create barriers to fully participating in the meeting. With purposeful training and knowledge, virtual IEP meetings can be more accessible than in-person options, creating more inclusive meetings for all. However, simply shifting meetings to virtual spaces without considering all facets of culture and identity creates additional barriers to successful student- and family-centered meetings. Instead, teachers must create virtual meeting spaces that reflect the tenets of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy Over the past few decades, several authors have put forth pedagogies and practices promising to honor and uphold the values of histories of students and families from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds (e.g., culturally responsive teaching; Gay, 2013; culturally relevant pedagogies [CRP]; Ladson-Billings, 1994; culturally sustaining pedagogies; Paris & Alim, 2017). Due to the stark cultural and Journal of Special Education Technology 0(0) racial contrast between the student and teacher body in schools (Redding, 2019), these practices may provide guidance to all teachers who teach students from CLD backgrounds. While not the same, the underlying purpose of these practices is to enhance the teachers’ and students’ awareness of racial, cultural, linguistic, and religious differences to teach them to successfully navigate mainstream educational spaces (Gay, 2013). Culturally relevant pedagogy provides teachers flexibility by allowing them to create learning spaces inclusive to people from all backgrounds (Francis et al., 2022). For this paper, we focus on CRP because it does not interfere with teaching styles and can be applied to overarching actions any educator can implement (Ladson-Billings, 1994). According to Ladson-Billings (2021), teachers may utilize different instructional approaches within the CRP framework so long as they follow three main elements: (a) focus on teaching, not assessing, (b) help students and teachers develop their cultural competence, meaning students and educators are “secure in their knowledge and understanding of their own culture— language, traditions, histories, culture, and so forth, AND are developing fluency and facility in at least one other culture” (Ladson-Billings, 2021, p. 71), and (c) develop the students’ socio-political or critical consciousness. Working with families from CLD backgrounds requires the same, if not more, attention to cultural differences than working with students. In many cases, students from CLD backgrounds have first-hand experience with the U.S. educational system, while this may not be the case for their families (Tejero Hughes et al., 2008). Teachers and other school personnel should take extra care and consideration when communicating with families from CLD backgrounds (Francis et al., 2022) to ensure they are informed and included in intentional ways. In addition, when teachers engage in CRP, they recognize their limitations in understanding the student’s culture. They can then take purposeful steps to enhance their understanding to create stronger bonds with families and students (Francis et al., 2022). The Need for CRP in Virtual IEP Meetings While all families may experience challenges when engaging with the special education system, they are often exacerbated for CLD families (Rossetti et al., 2017). During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, several other challenges became apparent. Issues, such as the increased digital divide between families from CLD backgrounds and their White counterparts, became an urgent matter to address (Gandolfi et al., 2021). Furthermore, families from CLD backgrounds who had access to technology reported that teachers would complain about their lack of experience with technology (Gandolfi et al., 2021). Due to schools’ lack of cultural responsiveness, languagebased support, and collaboration, along with deficit views of CLD families and children, school professionals do not always foster collaborative partnerships with CLD families (Fults & Harry, 2012; Rossetti et al., 2017). Although IDEA mandates 3 Feeney et al. that caregiver participation is required (Rossetti et al., 2020; Turnbull et al., 2022), families often feel judged and unheard instead of being equal partners in their child’s IEP development (Salas, 2004). Instead, partnerships must be reciprocal between families and professionals, where all agree to enrich each other’s expertise and resources with a common goal of benefitting students, family members, and professionals (Turnbull et al., 2022). For the special education process to be inclusive to families from CLD backgrounds, special education teachers must establish and maintain effective, honest, and culturally relevant relationships with students and families (Lavı́n et al., 2021). Ultimately, these relationships will help the special education process move forward in a way that acknowledges and honors students’ and families’ identities and assets, enriching the IEP team with family leadership, wisdom, and goals (Francis et al., 2016). Facilitating a Culturally Relevant IEP Meeting in Virtual Spaces Creating and sustaining partnerships that honor students and families is a dynamic process. This relationship must go beyond basic classroom communication for students who receive services and support under IDEA. Teachers need to engage families from CLD backgrounds in the decisionmaking process about their child’s IEP in multi-faceted, culturally responsive ways. Unfortunately, there are several existing barriers and challenges CLD families tend to face (i.e., due to differences in culture, belief systems, values, and perceptions of disability; Harry, 2008; Rossetti et al., 2017). When collaborating in virtual spaces, additional challenges often arise (e.g., regarding effective communication, technology expectations, and skill proficiency). Facilitating a virtual IEP meeting in which CLD families are valued and honored for their assets, can participate as equal partners, and feel comfortable voicing their needs and supports, ultimately leads to positive student outcomes (Rossetti et al., 2017). Therefore, it is critical that schools provide virtual IEP meetings as an option instead of mandating in-person meetings. The following sections provide steps on how to embed CRP in virtual IEP meetings; refer to Figure 1 for a visual overview. Prior to the IEP Meeting When working with families from CLD backgrounds, communication about the IEP process must be intentional and proactive. This fosters frequent communication and collaboration regarding the child’s progress throughout the year. When it is time to plan for the IEP meeting, teachers must initiate communication with enough time for families to make childcare and work-related arrangements. The scheduling process must prioritize the family’s needs and routines and should not be limited to what feels easiest for the school; being responsive in this way requires flexibility for meeting location, modality, and time of day. At the same time, teachers need to ensure resources are available for these families (e.g., translated documents and interpreters) to ensure families can participate equally in the meeting. The following two steps describe some of the considerations prior to implementing a virtual IEP meeting. See Table 1 for additional resources. Figure 1. Steps to facilitate a culturally relevant IEP meeting in virtual spaces. 4 Journal of Special Education Technology 0(0) Table 1. Virtual IEP Meeting Resources. Name of Resource Description Where to Access Wisconsin department of public instruction Center for parent information and resources Center for parent information resources Progress center: Promoting progress for students with disabilities Webinars, checklists, and slides for conducting virtual IEP meetings Resources for holding virtual IEP meetings A series of tip sheets for participating in virtual IEP meetings A video and slides about facilitating successful virtual IEP meetings The center for appropriate dispute resolution in special education A list of hyperlinked resources for facilitating virtual IEP meetings https://dpi.wi.gov/sped/college-and-career-ready-ieps/learningresources/virtual-iep-meetings https://www.parentcenterhub.org/virtual-iep-meeting-tipsheets/ https://www.parentcenterhub.org/wp-content/uploads/repo_ items/virtual-iep-meeting-tipsheets.pdf https://promotingprogress.org/resources/tips-facilitatingsuccessful-virtual-iep-meetings-during-pandemic-andbeyond https://www.cadreworks.org/virtual-meetings Step 1: Determine, Plan For, and Provide Necessary Language Supports. Prior to scheduling the meeting, the teacher must inquire if the family requires language assistance, such as working with an interpreter, to fully participate in the IEP meeting and other communications (Tran et al., 2018). Schools are required to communicate with families in a language that they can understand (IDEA, 2004). Although some CLD families are proficient in speaking English, they may request language assistance if they are unfamiliar with special education terminology or need assistance understanding written documents, such as their child’s IEP (Rossetti et al., 2017). The interpreters should be involved in scheduling the IEP meeting to ensure it is convenient for families and families know what to expect. CRP check: The special education teacher must communicate with the family prior to scheduling the meeting to inquire if an interpreter is needed and provide them with resources to assist with the special education jargon. packet and narrated video in both English and their home language) so that CLD families can learn how to use the online technology tool. Teachers should assist families with signing up to create an account, signing into an application on a computer to join a virtual meeting, or manipulating different features of the tool. However, since some CLD families may have limited access to technology and the internet, teachers should not assume they can participate in virtual meetings. If the families do not have access, teachers should devise an alternative way for them to participate. One way to do this is to provide families with a school device equipped with the required technology. Teachers should also meet with families to teach them how to enable their smartphones with the necessary e-platform prior to the scheduled meeting. CRP check: The teacher honors the family’s knowledge and experiences by ensuring they are prepared to participate and engage in the virtual IEP meeting. Mr James reflects on his recent communication with Min’s parents. Once they agree upon a date, Mr James confirms with Min’s parents that they would like an interpreter at the meeting and schedules one to be present. Instead of offering that the interpreter sit next to Mr James and share a screen at the meeting, he asks the interpreter to join the virtual platform on their own so it is more accessible to the parents during the meeting. Mr James continues to send translated copies of the IEP documents (i.e., Prior Notices, the draft IEP, copies of the parents’ rights) prior to the meeting so the parents can adequately review the information. The next time Mr James talks to Min’s parents, he asks about their access to technological devices. After learning that they each have a smart phone and laptop, Mr James asks if they are familiar with any online technology tools. Min’s parents share that they have used Zoom before, so Mr James double checks that Zoom is downloaded on their laptop. Mr James then sends written and video-recorded directions in their home language on how to use Zoom and all its components for reference if needed. Step 2: Determine Technological Access Needs. These technology tools are essential components for a virtual IEP meeting to be held collaboratively. Teachers need to contact families to see if they have access to technology, the internet, and various online technology tools (e.g., Zoom, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams). It is best to use the platform that both teachers and CLD families mutually agree on. However, if the families are unfamiliar with using those tools, teachers must provide them with a user guide with options for modalities (e.g., written Step 3: Share Related Tools and Features. Online platforms have many tools or features that can improve engagement, inclusion, and accessibility, but not everyone knows about them or how to use them. Rather than assuming students and families know how to find and use these tools, teachers should model, teach, and practice how to use them with the families. Once the families have learned where to find these tools and how they work, teachers can encourage families to use them. For example, most online technology tools have emojis that participants can use to express their feelings, agreements, and disagreements. These can be supplemented with written, gestural, or verbal comments 5 Feeney et al. to elaborate on thoughts or feelings. Teachers can also help the families determine which tools they find most beneficial and plan for utilizing them. This can happen 10–15 minutes before the IEP meeting begins or is scheduled in advance, depending on the availability of the families. CRP check: Teachers must ensure CLD families know how to operate the different features of the online meeting platforms. Mr James schedules a pre-meeting with Min’s parents to check for any connection issues and review how to use the different tools that Zoom provides. Although they mentioned previous experience with Zoom, Mr James wants to ensure that Min’s parents can comfortably utilize different options on the platform. After reviewing how to use the tools, he gives them time to practice and familiarize themselves with each. Step 4: Provide Additional Resources. Next, teachers should provide CLD families with bilingual resources (i.e., professionally translated information in their home language and English, not using potentially inaccurate translation services such as Google Translate) prior to the IEP meeting via email or traditional mail. Conversations can also be held via phone or video conference call to ensure the families receive the information and to ask if they have any questions regarding the paperwork. This information must include resources regarding advocacy organizations and support groups (Mueller, 2009) or from the Parents Training and Information Center (PTI; U.S. Department of Education, 2020). Parents must also be informed of their rights as mandated by IDEA (2004). Teachers should ensure interpreters or translation services are available to inform families of these rights and requirements and take additional time to explain these rights in-depth (Tran et al., 2018). This helps to ensure that prior to, during, and after the meeting, CLD families are knowledgeable and confident to participate and express their concerns regarding their child’s engagement and performance. In addition, teachers should encourage families to bring an advocate that understands special education to the meeting and facilitate their presence. Allowing families to advocate for their children, and encouraging this process is a step toward facilitating the third CRP tenet, which focuses on developing others’ socio-political or critical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 2021). By doing this, teachers will create a more equitable space during the meeting and show that they recognize CLD families as equal, valued partners during the IEP process (Gerzel-Short et al., 2019). Similarly, teachers can advocate for their students and families to do what is best for them. In addition to collaborating with advocates, teachers can voice student and family access needs to school administration, discuss and teach about ineffective processes or systems, and seeking out new or additional resources to improve the experience for students and families. CRP check: The teacher can encourage CLD families to ask for an advocate to assist them with the virtual IEP meeting process. As one last consideration prior to the meeting, Mr James compiles a list of resources that might be helpful to Min’s parents. He emails another copy of their rights home, along with information about community resources, advocates, doctors, and programs. In collaboration with the interpreter, Mr James creates an audio recording describing the resources he sends. During the IEP Meeting Families from CLD backgrounds are often unfamiliar with the procedures and language used throughout IEP meetings. By taking the initiative and completing the steps mentioned previously, teachers level the playing field so technological and communication needs do not interfere with the collaborative partnership between the family and the rest of the IEP team. The following steps outline how to maintain this relationship by creating culturally relevant virtual IEP meetings that engage and welcome families from CLD backgrounds. Step 1: Welcome Families into a Virtual Space. In many cultures, meetings begin with social questions aimed at establishing rapport. Through this process, sometimes called the Amistad Interview (Fierros & Bernal, 2016), all parties engaged in the meeting participate and share their experiences as an act of “good faith.” Teachers can establish rapport with the students and families by demonstrating how they value and care about their success. Sharing personal anecdotes and information creates a stronger bond between meeting attendees (Cheatham & Lim-Mullins, 2018; Fierros & Bernal, 2016) and sets a strong foundation for the remainder of the meeting. Furthermore, this process is essential to build partnerships with families focused on mutual trust and respect (Fierros & Bernal, 2016). CRP check: The teacher must establish rapport with CLD families by engaging in honest conversation and sharing personal stories demonstrating a basic level of trust. Looking at the camera on his computer, Mr James remembers how Min’s father previously mentioned his passion for the local baseball team. Mr James mentions the team and Min’s father’s eyes brighten up at the mention of baseball. The conversation turns to the Korean pitcher playing on the Major League Baseball team. Mr James now knows more about Korea and Min’s family and has started to develop a more comprehensive relationship with them. Step 2: Set Up a Supportive Space. To set up a supportive space for families, teachers must create a safe and culturally relevant virtual environment. Each participant in the meeting should be on their device (i.e., laptop, tablet, 6 Journal of Special Education Technology 0(0) phone). This allows the virtual screen to show the face and label of each participant individually. Additionally, participants should change their name in the technology platform to correspond with their position or role in the IEP team (e.g., Mr Martinez/Principal). This allows each participant to have an equal footing in the IEP meeting by providing much-needed context as to the role of each participant in the meeting. It also ensures that each participant shares an “equal” space on the screen, which provides a visual representation of equal participation. Table 2 provides additional recommendations for setting up an accessible, CRP-centered virtual space. CRP check: The teacher must ensure IEP team members have their names and roles listed on their screen. Prior to discussing the content of the IEP document, Mr James checks to be sure that all participants are on their own screens within the Zoom platform and have their names and role posted in both languages. He reminds Min’s parents how to pin the interpreter on their screen and turn on captions. Min’s parents then confirm they are ready and have the appropriate tools set up prior to moving on. Step 3: Facilitate the IEP Meeting Using CRP Tenets. It is essential to use a strengths-based approach when discussing and developing the IEP (Weishaar, 2010). The IEP process must be centered around the student and family; teachers should honor students and families as equal team members during all parts of the process. As previously mentioned, one of the advantages of CRP is that it can accommodate different styles and teaching methods. Regarding the IEP meeting, oftentimes facilitators may have meeting norms (Cook & Friend, 1991); other times, this may not be the case. However, teachers can still use the CRP tenets throughout the meeting to ensure it is successful. The special education teacher should ask the student and family for input on all components of the IEP and critically listen to their concerns or questions, and then take action (Yell et al., 2020). This includes strategies for support, strengths of the student, and suggestions for goals or accommodations. One actionable step teachers can implement during these virtual meetings is to remind the IEP members about participation options (e.g., the chat feature, hand raise feature, or mute/unmute buttons). Teachers can ask team members to indicate their thoughts with emoticons and reactions (e.g., thumbs up and thumbs down). By encouraging participants to share their ideas in ways that feel most comfortable to them, teachers acknowledge the ways that differences in cultural-based social norms may influence participation (Rossetti et al., 2017). When critical aspects of the IEP are discussed (i.e., present levels, goals, service delivery, placement), teachers should double-check for understanding. In addition, the teacher should add the family’s input to the IEP. One way to do this is for teachers to follow a participant’s comment with “what I hear you say is…” (Lavı́n et al., 2021). This re-phrase allows the participants to confirm that they are actively listening and ensures the family’s voice is centered. Table 2. CRP Recommendations for Virtual IEP Meetings. Technology Tool Editable display name Live closed captions and/or transcription Emoticons CRP Recommendations for Using Technology in a Virtual IEP Meeting • • • • • • • • • Chat function • • • Additional accessibility • • • • • • Encourage IEP team members to display their name and title Remind family members to reference the display name and title as needed Ensure the title is written in the families’ home language (e.g., teacher/Maestro) Turn on closed captioning and transcription tools in families home language Teach families how to turn on captions or transcriptions for additional meetings and/or as needed Share the transcript document with families after the meeting to reference and review Teach families to use the translation option to display information in their home language Teach families how to use emoticons to express themselves Use emoticons throughout the meeting to create a welcoming virtual environment and model various methods of participation Invite families to use emoji and reaction tools to express their thoughts in addition to speaking out Remind families that the chat box is available in case they prefer written communication Teach and model use of chat box prior to and during meetings, including how to send direct messages to team members or edit messages that were sent Encourage families to use home language in chat box when asking questions or addressing concerns Adjust the font size as needed so it is accessible to all participants Remind families that they can join from a browser instead of downloading the application Remind families that they can participate by phone or computer audio Ensure shared screens can be easily read on different devices (i.e., tablet, phone, computer); adjust documents accordingly (e.g., font size) Teach families to turn on multi-spotlight or multi-pinning to keep interpreters visible on the screen 7 Feeney et al. CRP check: The teacher must ensure they understand and incorporate the input from families into the IEP before moving forward. While the IEP meeting is taking place, Mr James frequently stops to ask Min’s parents to share their thoughts. He also encourages them to use the various tools to respond and models doing so during the meeting; Mr James uses the chat box and reaction tools while others are speaking to create a safe space for all IEP team members. Each time Min’s parents contribute, he re-phrases their comments to be sure he is understanding correctly. He then adds their comments to the IEP document and makes changes that reflect their knowledge of Min. Step 4: Reflect on and Close the IEP Meeting. Before closing the IEP meeting, the teacher should check in with the family regarding any questions or concerns they may have. It is critical for teachers to see the CLD family members as both experts and learners in this space, and reflect on the meeting accordingly (e.g., “How did I support the family in continuing to fully and confidently understand their rights?” “How did I teach the family about the processes and documents involved in the special education process?” “In what ways did I incorporate their expertise while making edits during the meeting?”). By focusing on both expertise and growth, the teacher is centering the meeting around the assets of the family. This also supports them in continuing to be active, knowledgeable members of the special education process both now and in the future. Before the meeting ends, meeting participants should conduct a review of the IEP. Teachers should thank families for their participation and briefly mention how their input has been incorporated into their child’s IEP. This validates the families’ ideas and lets them know their voices are heard, which is a critical part of CRP (Barrio, 2021; Barrio et al., 2017). Additionally, teachers should discuss how the IEP will be sent to each member for their signature, including an approximate date and time the information will be sent. At this time, the IEP members should re-share contact information with the family so they can address any questions that may arise after the meeting is adjourned. CRP check: The teacher must validate families’ ideas and lets them know how their input was used during the creation of the IEP document. After the IEP document has been discussed but prior to obtaining signatures, Mr James invites all members of the IEP team to review the changes made. He double-checks that the information is accurate, detailed, and reflective of all team members’ contributions, pointing out ways their voice was incorporated. Once the team agrees that the document is finalized, he thanks all participants for attending. Mr James lets the IEP team members know that he will be emailing a secure file to obtain their signatures, along with a paper-based file via mail. Mr James checks to ensure all contact information is accurate, then consults the interpreter regarding translated copies. After the IEP Meeting Tasks of implementing a virtual IEP meeting with CLD families are not done at the closure of a meeting; it is essential for teachers to follow up with the families afterwards. Prior to sharing the final document, it is important for teachers to ask the family members if they have any questions or additional concerns. Teachers can share the final version of the IEP a couple of days before they call or email the family (i.e., depending on the family’s preferred communication mode) to follow up so the families have some time to review the IEP. In some cases, family members might not have questions or concerns during the meeting. However, by providing CLD families additional time to process and review the information, teachers acknowledge the importance of the learning process (i.e., CRP’s first tenet; Ladson-Billings, 2021). Any concerns or questions can be sent via text or email, asked over the phone, or raised during an additional virtual meeting. Encouraging families to discuss their thoughts in their preferred manner, even outside of the meeting, helps to maintain the collaborative home-school, identity-honoring partnerships that are being established (Fierros & Bernal, 2016; Gerzel-Short et al., 2019). Once all members have had time to process the meeting and revisit any concerns, teachers should conclude this part of the special education process. Most importantly, teachers must provide the final version of the IEP to the family (Yell et al., 2020). This final version should be translated into the family’s home language (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2015; Office of Special Education Programs, 2016). CRP check: The teacher must follow up with families to ensure they understand everything being addressed during the meeting and that their voice is being heard. Mr James wants to be sure the documents are accessible to Min’s parents even after the IEP meeting. Therefore, he contacts the interpreter to provide a copy of the documents in Korean to Min’s parents no later than 2 weeks after the meeting. He asks Min’s parents to contact him at any time with additional questions or concerns. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic caused many disruptions to services for students with disabilities (Markelz & Nagro, 2022). While these challenges posed many barriers to effective learning opportunities, they also have created opportunities for schools to re-work their IEP meeting spaces to be more equitable, accessible, and collaborative. Because increased access and improved partnerships should be maintained regardless of pandemic mandates, it is crucial to prioritize equitable IEP meetings for CLD students and their families. Using the guidelines discussed above, teachers can continue to offer virtual IEP meetings as a permanent option. Each step of the process can supplement current in-person practices to 8 maximize the student’s and family’s experience (e.g., handdelivering of the bilingual resources, modeling and practicing the electronic platform in person together prior to the virtual meeting). Utilizing and maintaining virtual IEP meetings as an option allows school personnel to engage families from CLD backgrounds in intentional, identity-honoring ways, using the tenets of CRP (Ladson-Billings, 2021). As teachers implement the first two tenets of CRP, they demonstrate the value they hold for the students and their families. Without centering these two tenets, the third tenet of developing the sociopolitical or critical consciousness of CLD students and families will not happen (Ladson-Billings, 2021; Lavı́n et al., 2021). All partnerships (i.e., between teachers, students, and families) must focus on the three tenets of CRP and advocate for the student’s holistic success. It is the responsibility of all teachers to ensure that students and families are always equal partners in online spaces both now and in the future. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ORCID iDs Danielle M. Feeney  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7598-4612 Carlos E. Lavı́n  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0031-5777 Monique Matute-Chavarria  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-90863429 References Barrio, B. L. (2021). Culturally responsive individualized education Programs: Building transition bridges between families and schools. Intervention in School and Clinic, 58(2), 92–99. https:// doi.org/10.1177/10534512211051071 Barrio, B. L., Miller, D., Hsiao, Y. J., Dunn, M., Petersen, S., Hollingshead, A., & Banks, S. (2017). Designing culturally responsive and relevant individualized educational programs. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53(2), 114–119. https://doi. org/10.1177/1053451217693364 Cheatham, G. A., & Lim-Mullins, S. (2018). Immigrant, bilingual parents of students with disabilities: Positive perceptions and supportive dialogue. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(1), 40–46. Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1991). Principles for the practice of collaboration in schools. Preventing School Failure, 35(4), 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.1991.9944251 Fierros, C. O., & Bernal, D. D. (2016). Vamos a platicar: The contours of pláticas as Chicana/Latina feminist methodology. Journal of Special Education Technology 0(0) Chicana/Latina Studies, 98–121. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 43941617 Francis, G. L., Blue-Banning, M., Haines, S. J., Turnbull, A. P., & Gross, J. M. S. (2016). Building “Our School”: Parental perspectives for building trusting family–Professional partnerships. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 60(4), 329–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X. 2016.1164115 Francis, G. L., Kyzar, K., & LavÍn, C. E. (2022). Collaborate with families to support student learning and secure needed services. In J. McLeskey, L. Maheady, B. Billingsley, M. T. Brownwell, & T. J. Lewis (Eds.), High leverage practices for inclusive classrooms (2nd ed., pp. 43–53). Routledge. Fults, R. M., & Harry, B. (2012). Combining family centeredness and diversity in early childhood teacher training programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0888406411399784 Gandolfi, E., Ferdig, R. E., & Kratcoski, A. (2021). A new educational normal an intersectionality-led exploration of education, learning technologies, and diversity during COVID-19. Technology in Society, 66(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021. 101637 Gay, G. (2013). Culturally responsive teaching principles, practices, and effects. In Handbook of urban education (pp. 391–410). Routledge. Gerzel-Short, L., Kiru, E. W., Hsiao, Y.-J., Hovey, K. A., Wei, Y., & Miller, R. D. (2019). Engaging Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families of Children with Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 55(2), 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1053451219837637 Google (2022). Google meet accessibility. https://support.google. com/meet/answer/7313544?hl=en Harry, B. (2008). Collaboration with culturally and linguistically diverse families: Ideal versus reality. Exceptional Children, 74(3), 372–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290807400306 Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., Cui, J., Smith, M., Bullock Mann, F., Barmer, A., & Dilig, R. (2020). The condition of education 2020 (NCES 2020-144). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020144 Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Ladson-Billings, G. (2021). I’m here for the hard re-set: Post pandemic pedagogy to preserve our culture. Equity and Excellence in Education, 54(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684. 2020.1863883 Lavı́n, C. E., Jordan, A. W., & Francis, G. L. (2021). Back to Basics: Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in Special Education. The High School Journal, 105(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2021. 0010 Markelz, Andrew M., & Nagro, Sarah A. (2022). Recommendations for Special Educators and Families of Children With Disabilities to Maintain Legally Compliant IEPs During. Journal of Disability Law and Policy in Education. 9 Feeney et al. Microsoft (2022). Accessibility overview of Microsoft teams. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/accessibilityoverview-of-microsoft-teams-2d4009e7-1300-4766-87e87a217496c3d5 Mueller, T. G. (2009). IEP facilitation: A promising approach to resolving conflicts between families and schools. Teaching Exceptional Children, 41(3), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 004005990904100307 OSEP. (2016). Office of special education Programs communication. IEP Translation. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/policy_speced_ guid_idea_memosdcltrs_iep-translation-06-14-2016.pdf Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press. Redding, C. (2019). A teacher like me: A review of the effect of student–teacher racial/ethnic matching on teacher perceptions of students and student academic and behavioral outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 89(4), 499–535. https://doi.org/10. 3102/0034654319853545 Rossetti, Z., Redash, A., Sauer, J. S., Bui, O., Wen, Y., & Regensburger, D. (2020). Access, accountability, and advocacy: Culturally and linguistically diverse families’ participation in IEP meetings. Exceptionality, 28(4), 243–258. https://doi.org/ 10.1080%2F09362835.2018.1480948 Rossetti, Z., Sauer, J. S., Bui, O., & Ou, S. (2017). Developing collaborative partnerships with culturally and linguistically diverse families during the iep process. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(5), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059916680103 Salas, L. (2004). Individualized educational plan (IEP) meetings and Mexican American parents: Let’s talk about it. Journal of Latinos and Education, 3(3), 181–192. Tejero Hughes, M., Martinez Valle-Riestra, D., & Arguelles, M. (2008). The voice of Latino families raising children with special needs. Journal of Latinos and Education, 7(3), 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348430802100337 Tran, L. M., Patton, J. R., & Brohammer, M. (2018). Preparing educators for developing culturally and linguistically responsive IEPs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 41(3), 229–242. https://www.doi.org/10.1177/0888406418772079 Turnbull, A., Turnbull, R., Francis, G. L., Burke, M., Kyzar, K., Haines, S. J., Gershwin, T., Shepherd, K. G., Holdren, N., & Singer, G. (2022). Families and professionals: Trusting partnerships in general and special education (8th ed.). Pearson. U.S. Department of Education (2020). Special education – parent training and information centers. https://www2.ed.gov/ programs/oseppic/index.html U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (2015). Guidance to ensure English learner students have equal access to a high-quality education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/ list/ocr/letters/colleague-el-201501.pdf Weishaar, P. M. (2010). Twelve ways to incorporate strengths-based planning into the IEP process. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(6), 207–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505381 Yell, M. L., Collins, J., Kumpiene, G., & Bateman, D. (2020). The Individualized Education Program: Procedural and substantive requirements. Teaching Exceptional Children, 52(5), 218–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920906592 Zoom Video Communications (2022). Zoom is for everyone: Accessibility is at the heart of what we do. https://explore.zoom.us/ en/accessibility/ Author Biographies Danielle M. Feeney is an assistant professor of instruction in Special Education at Ohio University. She received her Ph.D. in Special Education from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas with expertise in learning disabilities, emotional behavioral disorders, and teaching English as a second language. Prior to joining OHIO, Dr. Feeney was a middle school Intervention Specialist and Special Education Instructional Facilitator in Las Vegas, Nevada. Dr. Feeney collaborates with colleagues and students to present and publish work on nontraditional teaching methods to better support pre-service teachers, improving student-centered instruction and individualized classroom autonomy for students with learning disabilities, and fostering equity-based, sustainable partnerships with caregivers from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Carlos E. Lavin is an assistant professor of special education at the College of Charleston. He earned his doctorate in special education from George Mason University in Fairfax Virginia. His research interests include the intersectional space occupied by Latinx students with dis/abilities, counter spaces in higher education institutions, and international special education. Before pursuing his Ph.D., Dr. Lavin worked as a special educator in a resource setting, focusing on students with autism, behavior problems, and learning disabilities for over 9 years. Dr. Lavin worked in dual language schools, charter schools and public schools in North Carolina. He now lives on James Island with his awesome wife and two amazing kids. Monique Matute-Chavarria is an assistant professor of Special Education at New Mexico State University (NMSU). Before obtaining her Ph.D. in Special Education, she worked with Nevada Early Intervention Services working with children from birth to three with disabilities. Dr. Matute-Chavarria identifies as a Black mother scholar, and Afro-Latina; therefore, her research focuses on Black students and families. Her research centers on the intersections of race, family, and disability. She also researches the use of hip-hop pedagogy practices (i.e., DJing) as a tool for writing with Black students with and without disabilities. Dr. Matute-Chavarria was awarded the must-read 10 award in 2022 for her article “Giving Voice to Aspirations: Engaging African American Parents With Children With Disabilities” in the Journal of Intervention in School and Clinic. Haerin Park is an assistant professor in the Department of Education at the University of Saint Joseph. Her research involves pre/in-service teachers’ conceptualizations of inclusion and inclusive practices for students with intersectional Journal of Special Education Technology 0(0) identities and school-family-community partnerships, particularly with families from CLD backgrounds. Yun-Ju Hsiao is an associate professor of Special Education at Washington State University Tri-Cities. Her research interests include families of students with disabilities, culturally responsive teacher preparation and practices in special education, evidencebased instructional strategies for students with autism spectrum disorders, and inclusive practices in general education classrooms.