Students With Hearing Disabilities: Educational Plan

Background

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia developed several reform plans recently and activated numerous programs that were inactive in the past. Additionally, in the educational field, the Ministry of Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia focused on the advancement of special education services. This was one of the most important trends in the field of education at the time (Battal, 2016). Due to the success of educational services provided to individuals with hearing disabilities, the sector is where Al-Amal institutes and integration classes concerned with providing instructive services at all levels have spread, including every stage of education system in all parts of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the Ministry of Education has taken care of providing the best educational support services.

The Al-Amal Institute for the Deaf was established in (Riyadh) in 1963 for people with disabilities in line with their different and varying problems and abilities, such as educational, psychological, social, and health needs. Recently, the Ministry of Education has developed the Regulatory Guide for Special Education in 2017, which aims to determine the nature of interactions between workers in special education institutes. The focus has also been on different types of educational plans, specifically the individual training strategy that should be available to every student with disabilities according to the organizational guidelines (Mngo & Mngo, 2018). The roles of each member of the multidisciplinary team responsible for implementing the individual educational plan are well clarified. For individuals with hearing problems, their concerns are handled in line with international laws such as the one in the United States of America: Education for All Handicapped Children Act which was retitled Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act in 1990 (IDEIA 1990).

The local and global trend towards developing educational services for individuals with special needs and their families made the Individualized Education Program (IEP) a cornerstone in determining learning needs in special education, setting goals, defining required and supportive services, and a mechanism for student assessment (Fish, 2008; Goldstein & Turnbull, 1982). In addition, IEP serves as a roadmap in the work of a multidisciplinary team and their decision-making commensurate with the capabilities of each case to obtain a successful educational service (Smith, 2006). Hard-of-hearing teachers aim, during their work, to provide the best educational practices and services for individuals with hearing disabilities.

As with the nature of any situation, there are many obstacles in the way of teachers that affect how to achieve the goals of the individual educational plan. Moreover, applying and activating the individual educational plan in the field requires ideal conditions suitable for achieving the learning process’s desired goals (Cavendish et al., 2020). The interaction between teachers and students is represented as the catalyst that pushes educators to raise the level of services for the better and thus implement the educational process in a coordinated manner that achieves the desired goals. Hence, a multidisciplinary team must contribute to the preparation of an individual educational plan according to the student’s condition (Battal, 2016). This team consists of teachers, specialist doctors, parents, mentors, social workers, and speech and rehabilitation specialists. With cooperation and planning among team members, a design is made: a strategy that includes all educational and support services that the student needs.

Benefits of Using IEP

IEP establishes the plan that enables educators, support staff, and parents to operate jointly to satisfy the needs of individual learners who necessitate additional support. It provides a more tailored teaching strategy for the learner. This may entail a group setting, unitization instructions (a step at a time), or quiet surroundings. IEP considers each student’s method of learning, in addition to their strong and weak points. This approach has the benefit of targeting all students’ points of interest and ability while enabling them to meet objectives past their existing skills. IEP integrates technology and other effective expertise to ensure an appropriate mode of learning (El Desoki, 2021). It upholds a constant learning pace for all students, which facilitates comprehension and knowledge acquisition. Additionally, it makes the school setting comfortable for all learners while striving to enhance their enthusiasm for learning.

Promoters of IEP

The IEP is promoted by a team from different educational fields, students with disabilities, parents, relatives, and delegated advocates. IEP referrals could be instigated by students’ study teams in any learning institution, but there is usually direct appeal for special education assessment. Such referrals may come from an educator, parent, or any other stakeholder (Battal, 2016). School districts have the responsibility of ensuring adherence to IEP and provision of services as prearranged. In addition, the IDEIA demands that school districts have the accountability of detecting, checking, and assessing learners who reside within their borders and who are likely to have a disability, child find.

Hindrances of IEP, Especially for Children with Hearing Loss

Unaddressed hearing loss results in retarded development of language and speech, with delays that are likely to result in learning difficulties, usually causing poor academic performance. Since inattentiveness and negative behavior normally accompany poor school performance, students with hearing loss are sometimes misidentified as having other learning disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The need for IEP is not a matter of intelligence; the fact that some students have hearing loss does not signify that they are less able to perform more excellently academically than their well-hearing peers. In most instances, it is the classroom setting that fails to support them adequately. For example, busy educators in large classes, or teachers with poor comprehension of hearing loss, usually find it difficult to vary their teaching approaches or overlook some learners’ disabilities while teaching and giving assignments.

Literature Review

The literature review provides an impression of learners with hearing loss through the provision of understanding of the disability and proper application of IEP in the teaching approach. It provides a comprehensive synopsis of the IEP while discussing the perception, knowledge, and skills of special education teachers anchored on established standards. The review of the literature centers on the special education system in Saudi Arabia and is guided by the research questions.

Aim of the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine special education teachers’ perceptions toward applying IEP. Such an examination can assist in the establishment of strategies that satisfy the needs of learners with disability in regular and inclusive settings. Effective application of IEP should be student and family-centered and generated in consideration of recommended practice. Successful IEP application is fundamental in making teachers and other stakeholders understand what, when, where, and how to teach students with disabilities effectively (Cavendish et al., 2020). It assists in proper monitoring and assessment of learners’ progress while suitably reporting on the impact of the interventions.

Research Questions

• What are the levels of applying IEP at schools for students with hearing loss in Saudi Arabia?
• How satisfied are teachers with their involvement in decision-making?
• What are the obstacles that teachers face when applying IEP?
• What are the promoters that teachers face when applying IEP?
• How can IEP be enhanced to improve special education teachers’ knowledge and perceptions toward applying it successfully?

Significance of the Study

The significance of this study is to add to the Arabic library through the contribution of an improved understanding of the insights of special education teachers instructing students with hearing loss in Saudi Arabia. The study focuses on teachers’ perception, knowledge, and skills for effective IEP application. Understanding the prerequisite skills and knowledge might assist in the demonstration of teachers’ practices of improving special education for learners with hearing loss (Alsraisry et al., 2020). Furthermore, the study results will benefit the development of the field by providing research-anchored data for educators in Saudi Arabia and supporting the establishment of successful teaching programs that help in the proper implementation of IEP. In the long run, the findings of the study will create a window for future research in Saudi Arabia concerning special education teachers, learners with hearing loss, and informing other nations of the best way of improving their educators’ skills.

Research Gap

There have been no previous studies in the field of hearing impairment and teachers’ application of IEP in Saudi Arabia. Of major concern to the study was the lack of studies concerning special education teachers’ perception, understanding of IEPs application, and educators’ perceived accomplishments in developing and implementing individual educational programs in Saudi Arabia. The lack of studies on the importance of the IEP in providing educational services necessitates research on enabling students with hearing loss and other disabilities to benefit from education just like their peers (Alshamri, 2019). Regardless of some of the special education teachers in Saudi Arabia teaching and interacting with learners with disabilities, there is minimal information on what educators know concerning individualized education for such students. Particularly, there is no research on the perception of special education teachers concerning adequate knowledge of IEP application or vital skills required to develop and implement effective programs. Successful IEP application necessitates understanding that individualized education is crucial to students with hearing loss and that educators require crucial skills to guarantee accomplishment.

Terminology

• Individual Educational Plan: It is a different written record required for all students eligible to obtain special education programs. It is offered to the learner whose qualification for special education plans has been established after the process of measurement and diagnosis. It determines the nature of the needs for special education services because of that disability so that their learning and educational needs are provided containing the desired goals according to certain adaptations within a specified period.
• Deafness: Deafness means severe hearing loss experienced by a child resulting in impairment in the processing of language acquisition through hearing, whether with or without auditory amplifiers (Alshehri, 2021).
• Degrees of Hearing Impairment: This indicates the state of hearing impairment: healthy (10-15 dB), very slight (16-25 dB), slight (26-40 dB), medium (41-55 dB), above average (56-70 dB), serious (71-90 dB), and very serious / deaf (91+ dB).
• Hearing Impaired Students: Hearing impairment: This means hearing problem, whether continuous or intermittent, which negatively affects the educational performance of the child, but that was not encompassed in the explanation of deafness, meaning it did not reach the degree of hearing loss of 90 decibels.
• Al-Amal Institutes: Schools that are specialized for providing educational services for students with hearing loss in Saudi Arabia
• Special Education Teachers: Education professionals who work with children with disabilities and who are certified, early intervention specialists. Their work is to provide education services to children with special needs (ALMedlij & Rubinstein-Ávila, 2018). These individuals often have specialized educational, academic, or professional qualifications to do their work.

Concerns of IEP

IEP establishes the plan that enables educators, support staff, and parents to operate jointly to satisfy the needs of individual learners who necessitate additional support. It provides a more tailored teaching strategy for the learner. This may entail a group setting, unitization instructions (a step at a time), or quiet surroundings. IEP considers each student’s method of learning, in addition to their strong and weak points. This approach has the benefit of targeting all students’ points of interest and ability while enabling them to meet objectives past their existing skills. IEP integrates technology and other effective expertise to ensure an appropriate mode of learning (El Desoki, 2021). It upholds a constant learning pace for all students, which facilitates comprehension and knowledge acquisition. Additionally, it makes the school setting comfortable for all learners while striving to enhance their enthusiasm for learning.

Promoters of IEP

The IEP is promoted by a team from different educational fields, students with disabilities, parents, relatives, and delegated advocates. IEP referrals could be instigated by students’ study teams in any learning institution, but there is usually direct appeal for special education assessment. Such referrals may come from an educator, parent, or any other stakeholder (Battal, 2016). School districts have the responsibility of ensuring adherence to IEP and provision of services as prearranged. In addition, the IDEIA demands that school districts have the accountability of detecting, checking, and assessing learners who reside within their borders and who are likely to have a disability, child find.

Hindrances of IEP, especially for children with hearing loss

Unaddressed hearing loss results in retarded development of language and speech, with delays that are likely to result in learning difficulties, usually causing poor academic performance. Since inattentiveness and negative behavior normally accompany poor school performance, students with hearing loss are sometimes misidentified as having other learning disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The need for IEP is not a matter of intelligence; the fact that some students have hearing loss does not signify that they are less able to perform more excellently academically than their well-hearing peers. In most instances, it is the classroom setting that fails to support them adequately. For example, busy educators in large classes, or teachers with poor comprehension of hearing loss, usually find it difficult to vary their teaching approaches or overlook some learners’ disabilities while teaching and giving assignments.

Levels of IEP Application

The way processes are laid out during the development of IEPs may assist special education teachers in teaching students with hearing disabilities excellently. The United States Department of Education stipulates the following stages for the development of IEP. The IEP assessment team at school should begin by reporting the learner’s present academic performance. This often emanates from evaluative practices, for example, observations, examinations, and assignments. Evaluation results could be provided by parents, educators, associated service providers, and other stakeholders. Secondly, yearly objectives should be established. Such objectives include achievements that IEP teams consider reasonable for the learner to attain in a year. Thirdly, the IEP team should prepare a list of special education and associated services required by the learner. This comprises supplementary assistance and services, in addition to adjustments for personnel, for example, professional development and training necessary to help the learner (Dimitrov & Alsadaawi, 2018). Fourthly, the team should explain the degree to which learners with a hearing problem will not engage with their other peers in the inclusive classroom or activities within the school. Fifthly, the learner’s involvement in the district and regional tests should be established.

Sixthly, the IEP team should indicate when the program will commence, how regularly it will be offered, the location of its provision, and the duration it will take. Seventhly, starting with students in their adolescence, transition strategies are crucial as a segment of the process. Therefore, the design should handle the courses preferable for the student to attain graduation (Abed, 2020). Eighthly, the plan should specify the necessary transition services to assist the learner in preparing for life and tasks after school adequately. Ninthly, the plan should include the rights that should be transferred to each student once they attain the age of adulthood. Tenthly, the IEP team should show how every learner’s progress will be evaluated at each level and the way their parents/guardians will be notified of the progress.

After the planning phase, the next level entails IEP implementation. This level has numerous purposes, such as legal, educational, placement, liability, and resource provision. Once implementation commences, the IEP evaluation level begins (Al-Shammari & Hornby, 2020). This is carried out in three major steps, including assessment of the learner’s progress, yearly review and necessary revision of IEP objectives, and an all-inclusive re-evaluation of the student. Since accountability involves checking whether the learner is making progress, the IEP team should explain all anticipations for the skills that students require to have in approaches that can be easily evaluated.

Teachers’ Satisfaction with Their Involvement in Decision-Making

Teachers’ contribution in decision-making is a vital recommendation for the success of IEP. Increased involvement of educators in decision-making is a crucial factor of the decentralization approach to IEP application. In the early phases of IEP implementation, teachers’ contributions should be encouraged to provide enhanced influence to learning institutions and facilitate administrative efficiency. Teachers’ participation in IEP decision-making gives them motivation, thereby facilitating their contribution and application of agreed practices (Alanazy & Alrusaiyes, 2021). The people close to students have adequate information on the required improvements, over and above being better placed to implement decisions. Teachers’ participation builds their enthusiasm, accountability, and inventiveness, leading to dedication and job satisfaction. It encourages special education teachers to have increased responsibility for all that happens in the school (Alquraini & Rao, 2020). Increased responsibility is facilitated by reinforcing educators’ ownership of plans and changes by offering them a voice in school policymaking to apply their professionalism better.

Teachers’ participation in decision-making generates cooperation, which is vital to the successful application of IEP. Additionally, it generates satisfaction, which eases the administration’s challenges since many people join hands to intellectually resolve arising concerns that may have remained troublesome to just a few individuals (Alzahrani, 2018). On the contrary, where teachers are not adequately involved in decision-making, they are dissatisfied, which leads to absenteeism, unnecessary excuses, and complaints that result in overall ineffectiveness, increased inefficiencies, poor productivity, and nonattainment of IEP goals.

Obstacles in IEP Application

One of the challenges that teachers face in applying IEP is insufficient experience in inclusion settings. Some special education teachers do not have adequate exposure to inclusive classrooms, which can pose obstacles to successful IEP application. In addition, newly hired special education teachers might find their early years particularly difficult (Almalki et al., 2021). Therefore, there is a need for effective collaboration and coordination efforts for all teachers to effectively understand the needs of all learners and the individualization of teaching. Another obstacle in IEP application could be improper knowledge in dealing with students with severe disabilities. Learners with severe disabilities demand high adaptation and medical care than their average counterparts. Therefore, special education teachers should be skilled in addressing profound hearing disabilities by creating lesson plans anchored on their capabilities (Alshamri, 2021). For educators who lack adequate knowledge, the student might not succeed in their academics. Additionally, learners could develop signs of the need for adverse medical attention, which an inexperienced teacher may assume and lead to negative effects on their health.

For students who have severe hearing disability, there is a need for timely intervention. If the required intervention is delayed, the learners do not usually proceed past the third grade. There are numerous challenges that the students experience, and which have a tremendous impact (Mohammed, 2011). For instance, if the educator turns their back on the learners when teaching, their voice will be channeled towards the chalkboard thus making the students miss sections of the lesson. Oral variations to assignments and classroom activities, unfamiliar pronunciation, or an educator who speaks fast may influence the learning of students with hearing disability negatively. Although hearing loss affects every facet of academic accomplishment, the facets that possibly experience the greatest impact are the ones concerning language concepts. For instance, vocabulary, sentence structure, idioms, and language arts are exceedingly hard for learners with hearing disability to grasp successfully.

Additionally, misunderstanding and frustration have a considerable role in causing poor academic attainment of students who have hearing disability. Although such students may have normal speech, they usually have problems hearing the educator from a distance and being distracted by background noise. Apart from academic concerns in class, learners who have hearing disability go through social struggles while interacting with their peers. Effective communication is paramount to social interrelations and healthy peer relations. Attributable to the failure to communicate with their peers successfully, students who have hearing disability usually experience sentiments of unhappiness and seclusion (Karaca et al., 2020). When students who have hearing loss are isolated from social interrelations or are not willing to engage in group activities because of the fear of embarrassment, the outcome is that they may become socially reserved, which may contribute to further discontentment. Furthermore, students who have hearing disability are slow to develop socially, which affects peer relationships negatively.

The inability to create activities that embrace all learners could hinder effective IEP application. Special education teachers should tackle the way learners interact with one another and promote every student’s participation. If adaptive tools are insufficient, it becomes difficult for educators to ensure a properly inclusive classroom (Mohammed, 2011). Another common obstacle in IEP application is addressing students’ behavioral problems. Most of the learners with hearing disabilities are already frustrated with being in school. Be it attributable to the failure to suitably understand academic content or problems controlling their emotions, such students’ frustrations mainly manifest as negative behavior. Creating time to understand learners’ disabilities and establishing coping techniques may enable students with hearing problems to develop proper control of their behavior (Hamidi, 2013). Moreover, a reward-based approach for positive behavior can act as a suitable deterrent compared to punishing learners with hearing problems for negative conduct. Although negative behavior should be dealt with, supporting learners towards proper conduct with the use of incentives is beneficial to motivating excellent performance. Overcoming the arising obstacles and assisting learners with hearing problems to realize their potential makes the efforts of special education teachers meaningful.

Promoters that Teachers Face in IEP Application

Parents are essential participants in the IEP team. They understand their children excellently and can inform teachers regarding their needs, strengths, and practices that should be implemented to improve the students’ education. Parents should provide knowledge of how their children learn, their interests, and other insights of students that they are the only ones who understand well (Wagner et al., 2012). They can also notify teachers how the skills that students are learning in class are being applied at home. The IEP team should also comprise additional professionals who have adequate knowledge and special expertise concerning hearing disabilities. Parents and school systems should invite specialists to take part in the team. Parents, for instance, might invite advocates who have sufficient knowledge of children’s hearing disabilities or other experts who can share knowledge concerning such students’ weaknesses and strengths (Musyoka & Clark, 2017). Reliant on children’s individual needs, other associated specialists who may attend IEP conferences may encompass speech and language pathologists, psychotherapists, and psychologists.

A characteristic IEP will encompass an evaluation of the student’s current degree of performance, a record of quantifiable objectives for the future, and a plan of how learners will advance toward attainment of set goals. Additionally, there is a need for considerable instruction and associated services considered vital to the realization of objectives (Karaca et al., 2020). Despite IDEA mandating the elements of IEP, federal laws guide different states to adopt practices, format, and additional details for inclusion in the program. For effective implementation, IEP should concentrate of learners’ special needs and essential curriculum values within each state. Making students’ needs the center of focus enables the individualization plan ensure easy accomplishment of the envisioned aims.

Improving Special Education Teachers’ Knowledge and Perceptions Toward Applying IEP

Educators’ role in teaching students who have disability have been highly restricted to the underlying needs and special education teachers in conveying lessons to the entire classroom. However, teachers’ role in teaching inclusive classes have continually been narrow since most educators feel that they are inadequately trained to deliver instructions to such students effectively. Moreover, many teachers feel overworked concerning their teaching responsibilities and may lack enthusiasm to focus on students with hearing loss (Mngo & Mngo, 2018). Particularly, educators who obtain sufficient training and support in the provision of necessary interventions have positive perception and zeal in teaching inclusive classrooms. The positive attitude concerning teaching students who have special needs results in improved teachers’ self-efficacy, which plays a vital role in the learners’ academic performance.

Policy decisions should engage institutions and tools that prepare educators to address hearing problems and teach learners with disabilities. Previous studies affirm that teacher education plans offer an increased influence on learners’ success (Mueller & Vick, 2019). Special education teachers’ training may be beneficial when the educators are free to choose lessons to review and revise attributable to quality responses that provoke thinking as opposed to emotions. Nevertheless, the quest for professional development for both students and educators should promote careful investment and develop instructional practices that make IEP application effective. The more the teachers’ knowledge, the high the likelihood that they will properly support inclusive education. For example, special education teachers who have a doctorate or master’s degree show considerably high positive perceptions and capability to teach students with hearing disabilities than their counterparts with a bachelor’s degree. Such affirmations show the need for the education system in Saudi Arabia to offer motivation to special education teachers to pursue higher learning in their field of specialization (Karaca et al., 2020). This is attributable to the fact that when teachers are highly educated, they are exposed to a broad scope of training that improves their capacity to teach learners with special needs.

Additionally, special education teachers and other school personnel with perceptions of discordance between plan intent and implementation guidelines might develop feelings of reduced effectiveness. Therefore, clear direction and maintained support for the application of policy directives and associated district programs are paramount for teachers to develop positive perceptions and meet their multifaceted duties and accountabilities (Rakap et al., 2019). Special education teachers affirm the necessity for supporting learners with hearing disabilities for a smooth transition from secondary school with substantial resources, for example, sufficient support and professionalism for the establishment and evaluation of self-determination proficiencies. Teachers articulate disappointment with the perceived restrictions in learning institutions and the available inadequate support, whereas they are responsible for successfully preparing learners with hearing disabilities for post-secondary experiences (Al-Shammari & Hornby, 2020). Many special education teachers express frustrations with how they even get to the point of using their finances to provide some of the students’ needs. Sometimes the teachers are forced to start fundraisers to gather required resources.

For many students with hearing disability, most educational instruction is provided by the special education teacher. The general education teacher is not prepared with a wide-ranging set of knowledge and skills regarding hearing disability to effectively address such students’ varying needs in inclusive classrooms. Teaching learners with hearing problems may be difficult and necessitate additional effort and time (Mueller & Vick, 2019). Therefore, there is a need for the ministry of education to assess each educator’s preparedness for and perception regarding teaching students with hearing loss in an inclusive setting. General education teachers have numerous responsibilities that could hinder their successful teaching of students with hearing disabilities. Apart from the teaching of the well hearing learners, the educators have to accommodate the different needs of diverse students, apply alternative plan of instruction, ensure proper involvement of interpreters, and evaluate academic improvement.

In the study by Mngo and Mngo (2018) that sought to underline hindrances and enablers to the inclusion of students with hearing problems, the findings were that learners at times do not obtain cooperation from educators in the provision of needed accommodations. The law directs special education teachers to create vital adjustments for students with hearing disabilities even when it could appear problematic. Nonetheless, sometimes educators feel that the recommended adaptations are impractical, unnecessary, or are contrary to their practices and interests. For proper teaching in inclusive classrooms, teachers should prepare instructions anchored in diverse interests, needs, and learning approaches. Therefore, it is essential for the teacher to use numerous teaching styles to suit the individual requirements and abilities of the learners. Implementation of the recommended strategies by general teachers is paramount for successful inclusion of learners who have hearing disabilities.

Methodology

This study employed a qualitative approach in which data was collected by interviewing eight teachers. Moreover, the research questions that guided the investigation require a broad explanation of how IEPs practices work. An effective procedure is valuable in carrying out data analysis, and interpretation since a better resolution of the underlying issue is realized (Patricia, 2017). The effective undertaking of the set methodology phases necessitates the research to have appropriate planning concerning how the research questions will be answered. The methodology part of this research offers a comprehensive plan that underscores the different procedures and processes that are essential in the realization of the goals of the study.

Research Design: Interviews

The researcher used a qualitative descriptive research design through the help of interviews. Interviewing of participants was desirable for this study since it offered a holistic comprehension of the research as it involved varied, thorough, and diverse data (Saldaña & Omasta, 2018). Furthermore, since a qualitative descriptive research design allows the research to be completed in the respondent’s natural setting, it guaranteed the collection of valuable and honest data in the form of interviews.

Data Collection Methods

The target population signifies all the people or units that suit a given condition under study. Additionally, it could represent all the members of a given well-distinct class of persons, subjects, or cases that may comprise living or non-living beings. For example, the population for this study comprises teachers who teach students with hearing loss in Saudi Arabia. To obtain the participants for the research, the researcher employed a convenience sample to recruit respondents for the qualitative study, 8 teachers, from a learning institution in Saudi Arabia. Consistent with Etikan et al. (2016), the convenience sampling may be described as follows:

A type of nonprobability or nonrandom sampling where members of the target population that meet certain practical criteria, such as easy accessibility, geographical proximity, availability at a given time, or the willingness to participate are included for the purpose of the study (p. 2).

Permission was obtained from the respondents before the interviews began, and their contact information was recorded once they had signed the informed consent form and agreed to participate. All interviewees were assured that their contribution to the study was of their free will, and respondents were notified that they could withdraw from the research at any time, devoid of repercussions. Lastly, the information obtained from the respondents was kept confidential, with their identities protected and not shared or disclosed to anyone. Pseudonyms were assigned to each participant to protect their privacy further.

Research Instrument

The interview protocol was developed after reviewing the literature and reflecting upon current practices described in the studies. The length of the interviews ranged from 30 to 45 minutes. The method employed for this study was based on a semi-structured interview to allow the researcher to talk with the subjects and diverge from a particular question based on the flow of the conversation. This design is very commonly used in social sciences fields.

Procedure

Qualitative information was collected in the research using interviews as the data collection technique. These interviews aimed to investigate in-depth teachers’ experience about IEPs practices. The interviews were conducted in person and over the phone (the time limit for the interviews was approximately 30-45 minutes). The qualitative method for this data collection phase was a semi-structured interview that allowed the researcher to interview subjects and smoothly deviate from each question based on the flow of the interchange. This interview technique was selected for the current study because it allows the researcher to gather information in greater depth than quantitative data collection techniques (Saldaña & Omasta, 2018). It also helps the researcher understand major themes.

Data Analysis Method

Data obtained during this stage of the research was analyzed using the thematic analysis method after answering the interview questions. The researcher used phone calls and Facetime to collect the qualitative data. These findings were then organized as themes and analyzed through the thematic content analysis method, which Creswell (2012) defined as a technique for analyzing thematic patterns that emerge in research investigations. A theme is a generalized and summarized description of a set of interrelated issues regarding the phenomena. According to Saldaña (2013), “a theme is an outcome of coding [and] categorization” (p. 14). The technique involves six key steps: (a) familiarization with the data; (b) ciphering (labeling the text); (c) probing for themes in wider patterns of connotation; (d) theme appraisals; (e) identifying themes; and (f) a brief account (Saldaña, 2013). The benefits of a thematic method of data analysis were apparent in its provision of profundity and detail, which allowed a practical understanding of the underlying attitudes, behavior, perceptions, and impact. This played a significant role in creating suitable solutions to alleviate the problems facing special education teachers while teaching students with hearing disabilities.

References

Abed, M. G. (2020). Stakeholders’ views of children with special needs in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 13(4), 273-286. Web.

Alanazy, M. M., & Alrusaiyes, R. F. (2021). Saudi pre-service special education teachers’ knowledge and perceptions toward using computer technology. International Education Studies, 14(3), 125-137. Web.

Almalki, S., Alqabbani, A., & Alnahdi, G. (2021). Challenges to parental involvement in transition planning for children with intellectual disabilities: The perspective of special education teachers in Saudi Arabia. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 111, 1-10. Web.

ALMedlij, M. A., & Rubinstein-Ávila, E. B. (2018). The development of LD education in Saudi Arabia: Services and implications for the future. International Journal of Modern Education Studies, 2(2), 83-96. Web.

Alquraini, T. A., & Rao, S. M. (2020). Assessing teachers’ knowledge, readiness, and needs to implement Universal Design for Learning in classrooms in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(1), 103-114. Web.

Al-Shammari, Z., & Hornby, G. (2020). Special education teachers’ knowledge and experience of IEPs in the education of students with special educational needs. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 67(2), 167-181. Web.

Alshamri, K. H. (2019). Evaluation of education students with intellectual disability in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Education and Learning, 8(1), 131-137. Web.

Alshamri, K. H. (2021). The challenges of online learning for teachers of children with intellectual disability in the COVID19 pandemic: Qualitative method. Journal of Education-Sohag University, 1(1), 77-94.

Alshehri, Y. D. (2021). Comparison of special education services in Saudi Arabia and Thailand. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction and Educational Technology, 7(1), 95-114. Web.

Alsraisry, N., Albakheet, H., Alsajjan, N., & Aldaajani, N. (2020). Blended learning approach for deaf or hard of hearing students: Investigating university teachers’ views. Amazonia Investiga, 9(32), 36-44. Web.

Alzahrani, M. A. (2018). The importance of teachers’ universal design for transition principles knowledge in preparing students who are deaf and hard of hearing for the life after school in Saudi Arabia. Creative Education, 9(03), 513-520. Web.

Battal, Z. M. B. (2016). Special education in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Technology and Inclusive Education, 5(2), 880-886.

Cavendish, W., Morris, C. T., Chapman, L. A., Ocasio-Stoutenburg, L., & Kibler, K. (2020). Teacher perceptions of implementation practices to support secondary students in special education. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 64(1), 19-27. Web.

Creswell J. (2012). Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.

Dimitrov, D. M., & Alsadaawi, A. (2018). Latent profiles of performance on certification testing: The case of special education teachers in Saudi Arabia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(9), 2029-2035. Web.

El Desoki, D. R. (2021). The attitude of the persons who are dealing with disabled people with different disabilities towards integrating the disabled with ordinary people. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction and Educational Technology, 7(2), 55-82. Web.

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. Web.

Fish, W. W. (2008). The IEP meeting: Perceptions of parents of students who receive special education services. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 53(1), 8-14. Web.

Goldstein, S., & Turnbull, A. P. (1982). Strategies to increase parent participation in IEP conferences. Exceptional Children, 48(1), 360–361. Web.

Hamidi, M. (2013). The degree of application of the individual educational plan in autism programs from the point of view of autism teachers in the city of Jeddah. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 12(1117), 1-10. Web.

Karaca, M. A., Toprak, H. H., & Çikili, Y. (2020). An investigation of the Turkish preservice teachers’ attitudes towards individualized education program development process. Online Submission, 11(16), 88-98. Web.

Mngo, Z. Y., & Mngo, A. Y. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions of inclusion in a pilot inclusive education program: Implications for instructional leadership. Education Research International, 2018. Web.

Mohammed, A. (2011). The reality of the individual educational plan and its most important obstacles from the point of view of parents with special needs. Educational and Psychological Studies, 71(1), 309-361. Web.

Mueller, T. G., & Vick, A. M. (2019). Rebuilding the family–professional partnership through facilitated Individualized Education Program meetings: A conflict prevention and resolution practice. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 29(2), 99-127. Web.

Musyoka, M. M., & Clark, M. D. (2017). Teachers’ perceptions of individualized education program (IEP) goals and related services. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 29(1), 5-23. Web.

Patricia, L. (2017). Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches (1st ed.). The Guilford Press.

Rakap, S., Yucesoy-Ozkan, S., & Kalkan, S. (2019). How complete are individualized education programmes developed for students with disabilities served in inclusive classroom settings? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 34(5), 663-677. Web.

Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Sage.

Saldaña, J., & Omasta, M. (2018). Qualitative research: Analyzing life (1st ed.). Sage Publications.

Smith, D. D. (2006). Introduction to special education: Making a difference (6th ed.). Pearson/Allen and Bacon.

Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Javitz, H., & Valdes, K. (2012). A national picture of parent and youth participation in IEP and transition planning meetings. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 23(3), 140-155. Web.