Special Education Law Blog

Teaching Your Child to Read: Read 180, System 44 and Beyond

It is remarkable to me how many IEPs provide for reading programs that are not individualized to the student’s needs and do not produce meaningful results.  A one-size-fits all approach simply doesn’t work for students with reading disabilities.  What may be an otherwise perfectly acceptable reading curriculum often is inadequate to meet the individualized needs of a particular student.  More and more frequently I am finding myself attending IEP meetings for students who are repeatedly failing to meet their IEP goals and am confounded by the insistence of the IEP team to continue implementing a program or curriculum that is clearly not working for the student.  This posturing is denying the student access to FAPE, or a Free Appropriate Public Education.  In many instances, students with specific reading disorders, such as dyslexia, are slotted into a specific reading program for intervention that isn’t even designed to address their needs.  What is provided to the student is based on expediency, availability of programming in the district, and not the needs of the student.

The Debate on Reauthorizing NCLB

With a Republican controlled Senate and a Republican controlled House, it appears likely that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), first enacted in 1965 and re-authorized as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001, may finally again be re-authorized.  Sen. Lamar Alexander, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP) and Representative John Kline of the House Education and the Workforce Committee have both released new versions of the bill for consideration in this Congress.  But because these bills appear to be watering down many of the accountability provisions of NCLB and lowering expectations for students, civil rights groups and advocacy groups are very concerned about the effect of these bills on disadvantaged students or those with special needs.

Retention v. Social Promotion

A mother in the Bronx is arguing against the social promotion of her 11-year-old son with special needs because she believes he is not ready for 6^th grade.  What the mother is asking for seems reasonable—if her son has failed to master 5^th grade work, why would he be able to do 6^th grade work?  Yet, the school’s desire to socially promote the student is unusual.  But is the alternative, grade retention, a more viable option? 

Social promotion became popular in the 1970s due to fears that its alternative; namely, retention, led to issues with self-esteem for those students who were “flunked” a grade.  However, social promotion fell into disfavor in the 1980s with the recognition that students who were receiving high school diplomas were ill­-prepared for either college or work.  Social promotion went on to became a political issue when President Clinton, in his 1999 State of the Union Address, declared that, “No child should graduate from high school with a diploma he or she can’t read.  We do our children no favors when we allow them to pass from grade to grade without mastering the material.”  

A New Bill Introduced in Congress Attempts to Combat Bullying

A congresswoman out of California introduced the Safe Schools Improvement Act during the week of April 11, the measure is meant to combat bullying. The Safe Schools Improvement Act (SSIA) would amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to require schools and districts receiving federal funds to adopt codes of conduct specifically prohibiting bullying and harassment, the bill would also require schools to collect data on incidents of bullying.  The SSIA would also require that states report data on bullying and harassment to the Department of Education.  Additionally, the SSIA would require that school districts establish and monitor performance indicators for the prevention of bullying and would have to inform parents of who in the district is designated to deal with reports of bullying. 

Bullying is an issue that we are seeing frequently in our office. Students have required hospitalization for the physical and mental health ramifications of bullying. It is an issue that schools are often ill-equipped or unwilling to handle. With the reason string of bullying-induced suicides this is a vital issue. The bullying seems to be occurring based on real or perceived differences including a disability. The SSIA would provide accountability for the schools who are often not doing enough to stem the tide of bullying. 

 

 

Special Education Administrators Polled about the Impact of the Economy on Special Ed

While it is not secret that the economic decline has affected all areas of the education system. A new poll recently showed how special education administrators are blaming the economy on problems that have been happening for years. It is apparent from our increasing call volume that the special education system is suffering. Special educators were polled in a national survey and pointed to budget cuts which force larger class sizes, layoffs and other changes that compromise their ability to serve students with disabilities. 

In the poll of 701 special education administrators from 45 states, nearly all reported that they are experiencing or expect to see an “increased strain on the availability of services” for students with disabilities, according to the Council for Exceptional Children, a professional organization for special educators, which conducted the survey.

The budget squeeze in most districts is inevitably challenging the special education departments, however it is not a reason to limit services, evaluations or to remove eligibility. This is what we are seeing in our office. School districts are using new techniques to remove services and supports or in the worst case scenarios, eligibility. The school districts are also using RtI as a long-term alternative despite the intention of RtI which is meant to be a short-term intervention/identification tool. This is a ploy by the school districts to limit the number of students who are eligible for special education services. OSEP recently came out with a memo directly contradicting this practice and cautioning school districts against overusing RtI and failing to evaluate students properly. Evaluations and standardized tests cannot be replaced by CBMs and classroom observations. The economy is a consideration but it should not be used as an excuse to not provide students with disabilities a FAPE. 

 

Moving Children Around A Failure in Chicago

Arne Duncan's, former head of Chicago Public Schools and now U.S. Secretary of Education, strategy in Chicago was to move children out of underperforming schools to other schools.  The only problem is that the "other schools" were also underperfoming. No surprise that this variant on NCLB of moving children around  has not been effective for students. It did however make for good press allowing Mr. Duncan to become Secretary of Education Duncan.

I am a President Obama supporter on most issues, but picking Arne Duncan was not a smart move. Chicago's schools are and have been systematically broken and lot of that responsibility lies with Mr. Duncan's lack of effective leadership (see e.g. Download AccessLiving_Ren_2010) [Click for background information on Renaissance 2010 a Duncan lead proposal]. Now we are getting the same on the national level:

"A Chicago-style strategy is a feature of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s push for the nation to turn around its lowest-performing schools. Mr. Duncan was the chief executive officer of the Chicago public schools from 2001 until December 2008, when President Barack Obama nominated him as education secretary. School closings are one element of the so-called “turnaround” plans Mr. Duncan has promoted as secretary, which also include measures that would replace principals and teachers in persistently failing schools."

I have very low expectations of anything effective coming from Mr. Duncan's leadership on a national level. We need to move him out and someone with real ability into this role.

Unusual Pattern of Gains and Failures in NCLB Test Scores

In Maryland there has been an unusual spike in test scores among public school students. Some of the increases are so high that questions are being raised as to whether the scores are valid. In particular an expert in  education policy stated:

" I think most people are trying to do the right thing," said Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy. "But the pressure to get results is enormous, and some people fail. Some people sin."

Apparently, Denver and Texas have also experienced remarkable reversals in test scores in its schools. Huntsville, Alabama elementary schools are showing incredible gains over last year as well, even though some of its high schools are still lagging. Bragging rights in Alabama go to  Birmingham where the majority of schools met most of their  NCLB goals. However, Springfield, Missouri fell short on its NCLB testing but that is ok with the superintendent because it was the students with special needs who fell short. However, state-wide in Minnesota more schools were not making the NCLB grade. This latest bit of information only makes the other state's data even more suspect since Minnesota is historically a state that invests a lot in education and achieves excellent results. Similarly Massachusetts and Pittsburgh schools are lagging on NCLB standardized. testing. The standard answer at least in Pittsburgh is that we generally are doing fine but it was those special education students that pulled us down.

NCLB Reauthorization

Here is the latest on NCLB reauthorization. Not surprsingly the NEA, teacher's union, would prefer to have the accountability in the Act relaxed. I am hoping for a private righ of action but I suspect that I will continue to have to just hope. I do not expect a new NCLB until after the election.

Nod to my friend, Sandy Alperstein for sending this link to my attention.

Administration Proposals For NCLB Would Leave Many More Children Behind

The U.S. Department of Education has proposed revisions to NCLB which would permit as many as 30% of all children with special needs to meet standards at a substandard level.  In effect this proposal permanently leaves behind many students with special needs especially those with learning disabilities. {This news story came to my attention from a reader, Karen Purcell]

NCLB Up for Reauthorization and Revision

Now that the Democrats have taken over the Congress, the debate over the reauthorization of NCLB has begun in earnest according to a recent New York Times article. Among the issues the Democrats are raising are as follows: