August 2009 Archives

One of the many benefits of working at Education Week is that we operate on schedule similar to schools. We don't get an entire summer off, but we still approach the beginning of our "academic year" with the same excitement and sense of renewal and new possibilities that I remember from when I was in school.

So it's with excitement, but also sadness, that I am saying goodbye for now. I am leaving Education Week for the next academic year and moving to Ann Arbor, Mich., where I'll be one of 21 American and international journalists chosen this year to be Knight-Wallace Fellows at the University of Michigan.

It is a cliche, but it must be said: I truly could not have gotten this fellowship without all of you: those of you who have read my work, e-mailed me, called me, gently corrected my errors, and allowed me to question you again and again as I worked my way through some very complex topics. Thank you for your time, your help, and your openness. As a part of the fellowship application, I had to explain why this beat is important. Because of all of you, I understand that deeply.

The blog will not go dark while I'm away. Lisa Fine, my predecessor on this beat at Education Week, will be taking over blog duties while I am away, as well as writing stories for the newspaper. She is a perfect fit for this position because she is already familiar with some of the complexities of this beat. She'll be starting on Aug. 31.

I look forward to rejoining everyone next June!

Posted by Christina Samuels at 1:47 PM | Permalink | 7 Comments | Recommend

My colleague Mary Ann Zehr recently wrote in her Learning the Language blog about a Government Accountability Office report on teacher preparation programs. The report notes that the programs generally require a class in teaching students with disabilities, but very few have that same requirement for teaching students who are English-language learners.

The broader conclusion of the GAO report is that several federal programs support training teachers in special education and instruction of ELLs, but that better coordination in the Education Department would help coleges and universities more.

Read more about the study and see a link to the report here.

Posted by Christina Samuels at 1:40 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Earlier this week, I asked what single thing people would change about the special education system to make it function better. Marcus A. Winters and Jay P. Greene, two fellows at the Manhattan Institute, suggest that one solution could be vouchers.

The authors have written several papers in support of special education vouchers, and their latest report, released Tuesday, says the voucher program in Florida, called McKay Scholarships, has worked to slow down mislabeling of students as being in need of special education.

We contend that the reduction in SLD classification observed in the Florida schools after the introduction of a voucher program results from denying public schools what they understand to be the economic benefit of receiving a supplemental payment from the state for every additional child designated as suffering from an SLD. Thus, special-education vouchers appear to constrain costly growth in special-education enrollments.

That's an interesting contention. My first thought is that there also seem to be disincentives to labeling a child, because you can't just call a student "learning disabled" and wait for the money to roll in. There are certain responsibilities on the part of the school district that must be met for every child that is designated as being in need of special education services. Winters and Green address that issue:

Whether the revenue from state and federal subsidies for special education exceeds costs and offers schools a sufficient financial incentive to move students into special education who would not have been moved there otherwise is not something that can be observed directly.

But we can infer the influence of those incentives from schools’ behavior. Since we know from previous research that schools increase special-education enrollments in response to financial incentives, we have reason to believe that the additional revenue that comes from identifying certain students as disabled exceeds the additional costs and, by implication, that the schools know that it does.

I haven't done the research of these two authors, and my anecdotes as a reporter do not equal "data." It's my sense, however, that both parents and schools play a role in increasing special education designations. For parents in some communities, perhaps that designation comes with some extra help that they believe their child needs.

In other communities, schools could possibly be labeling children for the perceived financial benefit, but they also could be using faulty diagnostic tools. I wonder how widespread the use of response to intervention is in Florida, and if that intervention model could also be exerting some downward pressure on the number of students labeled as learning disabled. Supporters of RTI say that it is supposed to do just that.

The federal government, in the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, has also made the overidentification of minority students for special education an issue that districts must address and try to prevent. Could that also be a factor here?

There's also a possibility that because of the voucher option, some children are not being diagnosed a having a learning disability who legitimately have one. The authors note this possibility in their conclusion:

One could interpret the result that we and previous research found in one of two ways: under McKay, there is less overclassification; or, under McKay, schools respond to the risk of losing funding by failing to diagnose as disabled some students who are in fact disabled. Although we can only speculate at this point, the tremendous growth in special education over the last few decades, along with the fact that much of this growth has been confined to the mildest form of learning disability—which happens to be the one in which subjective diagnostic judgments play the largest role—leads us to believe that the former interpretation is more likely.

What do you think? Have the authors put forward a convincing case?

Posted by Christina Samuels at 2:24 PM | Permalink | 8 Comments | Recommend

Education Secretary Arne Duncan spoke Tuesday before a group of state special education officials gathered in Washington, pledging his commitment to prevent "horrific tragedies" resulting from inappropriate use of seclusion and restraints on students, and asking officials to be a part of the development of common state standards to make sure the unique needs of students with disablities are considered.

Duncan spent much of his time talking about the broad policy agenda that the Obama administration is pursuing. He noted that more than half of students with disabilities spend most of their school day in general education classrooms.

"How how do we make sure not just special education teachers, but every single teacher, can be a teacher of children with special needs?" Duncan said.

Duncan also said that the department was relying on good ideas from parents, teachers, and state officials.

"Before I came to Washington, I definitely didn't think all the good ideas came out of Washington; now that I'm Washington I know all the good ideas don't come out Washington," he said, drawing a laugh from the crowd.

Duncan took a few questions from audience members after his comments. A Missouri state official said that her state is ready to start "scaling up" some of its successful practices, but doesn't have the money to do so. Duncan said he didn't have an easy answer, but that the Race to the Top program might be a source of funding for programs in that state.

Mary Watson, the current president of the National Association of State Directors of Special Education, said that her state has had its alternate assessment for students with disabilities rejected "two or three times" by peer reviewers from the Education Department. (This blog post talks about Texas, a state that has had its alternate assessment approved.)

The process is discouraging for the state and for students, who are not getting an opportunity to demonstrate what they know, Watson said. She praised the priorities that Duncan outlined in his speech, adding: "I just encourage you to keep that vision, to think differently, and to understand that not every child is exactly the same."

Duncan said that the federal government is looking for models that can help states in the process of creating alternate assessments. "It's a huge issue that I'm focused on," he said.

Posted by Christina Samuels at 6:19 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Before I worked at Education Week, I spent six years as a reporter for The Washington Post, where I covered the Prince William school district in suburban Northern Virginia. I covered everything that happened in that district, not just issues related to special education—in fact, I tried to avoid such stories, because they all seemed so complex and difficult to write about.

So, I felt a pang of recognition when I read this column by my former colleague, Jay Mathews, about a mother who is seeking a specialized placement for her son that her local school district appears unwilling to give:

I admit that education writers in general, and I in particular, write very little about learning disabilities and the many failures of federally mandated public school programs to help students who have them. I often say the cases are so complicated I have difficulty translating them into everyday language, and even then readers struggle to understand.

But that is not the whole truth. I also avoid special education stories because they all seem the same, one tale after another of frustrated parents and ill-equipped educators trying but failing to find common ground, calling in lawyers while the children sit in class, bored and confused.

Kelli Castellino's son Miguel has learning disabilities that have been covered under a "Section 504 plan" rather than under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. I've written about the differences between the two laws in this blog post. I also wrote a post about how changes to the Americans with Disabilities Act could affect Section 504 students

Mathews doesn't offer a solution to this situation. Instead, he throws it to readers, and like many of these articles, the comment section is as interesting as the story itself.

I actually see many potential "solutions" to this particular problem, keeping in mind that I don't know what has already been tried. Perhaps this dispute can be resolved in mediation. Perhaps Miguel can move to another school. Tutoring might make up for some of his academic deficits.

But the questions posed here are bigger than just one student. As Mathews says, "The old way is rutted, bumpy and slow. It is not taking us very far. We need something new."

If there were one piece of the special education "industry" that you could change, what would you do?

Posted by Christina Samuels at 6:05 PM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

Last summer, the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch wrote a report on the incidences of corporal punishment in schools in a report called A Violent Education. I wrote a blog post about the document, which included a separate section specifically on corporal punishment and its frequent use with students receiving special education services.

Now, the two groups have teamed up for a new report that talks just about corporal punishment among students with disabilities. Called Impairing Education, this new study, which was released earlier this week, noted that students with disabilities made up 18.8 percent of students who suffered corporal punishment at school during the 2006-2007 school year, although they constituted just 13.7 percent of the total nationwide student population.

From the press release:

The report found that some students were physically abused for conduct related to their disabilities, including students with Tourette syndrome being punished for exhibiting involuntary tics and students with autism being punished for repetitive behaviors such as rocking. In some cases, corporal punishment against students with disabilities led to a worsening of their conditions. For instance, some parents reported that students with autism became violent toward themselves or others following corporal punishment.

There's a lot of news stories out about the report, but I particularly liked this blog post on the Get Schooled blog run by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Georgia is a state where paddling in schools is legal, and the post prompted a lively discussion from parents, some pro-paddling, some against it.

Posted by Christina Samuels at 6:58 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The 88-year-old founder of the Special Olympics died today in Hyannis, Mass. Patricia Bauer has compiled several news articles on Shriver's life at her own blog, Disability News. The Special Olympics has put together its own tribute page as well.

Shriver's speech at the 1987 Special Olympics World Games is being quoted and re-quoted today as a part of her legacy. And it belongs on this blog too, because it speaks to the very reason "special education" exists—not as a gift, but an entitlement:

The right to play on any playing field? You have earned it. The right to study in any school? You have earned it. The right to hold a job? You have earned it. The right to be anyone’s neighbor? You have earned it.

Words to remember.

Posted by Christina Samuels at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

My blog post "How to Grow a Special Education Teacher" has gotten quite a few comments—I've enjoyed reading the conversation there. Now, here's a concern about a different area of specialized teaching, as published in a recent Dallas Morning News article:

Enrollments are dwindling in graduate education programs that focus on training teachers to work with gifted students. The state doesn't require the programs, few school districts pay teachers to take them, and teachers who get the training generally are not paid higher salaries.

That leaves gifted students – those with higher-than-normal intelligence who are particularly motivated – in classes with teachers who may have little training in their special needs.

It strikes me that the same skills in differentiating instruction that are so important for a special education teacher would be just as important to have as a teacher of gifted students. Training in tiered intervention models would seem to work just as well for students who are gifted: there's the basic instruction that every student gets, and then those who show the ability to grasp lessons quickly could move up the tiers, as necessary.

And, I've heard for years about the concern that so-called "twice-exceptional" children, who are gifted and have special education needs, are underserved.

This article only looks at one state, but it makes me wonder if the issues in teacher training for the gifted are as acute as training for teachers in other special education fields.

Posted by Christina Samuels at 5:21 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

The Bethlehem, Pa. school district says that a parent is trying to harass them by filing 22 due process hearing requests in eight years, and now they want her to pay the district's legal fees.

In an article in the The Morning Call of Allentown, Pa., the district says that the parent, Diana Zhou, has a history of refusing to agree to special education plans for her two children. The district also claims that the parent had a specific purpose in mind, according to the article:

...the suit states Zhou intensified her ''vexatious'' behavior when she told state mediator William Haussman on Nov. 24, 2008, she was ''engaging in due process procedures to drive up costs for the district so that the district would agree to pay'' for her children to attend private Moravian Academy in downtown Bethlehem.

Reached at her home Tuesday, Zhou, who does not have an attorney, said she did not receive a copy of the suit. She declined to comment, except to say she worried about a backlash against her two children, who still attend school in the district.

You can read a copy of the lawsuit here.

Perry Zirkel, a special education law expert at Lehigh University, says that proving a case is frivolous is difficult, but it's a sign that districts "are willing to fight back." Judging by the amount of money that can be expended by some school districts to defend themselves in due process hearings, I think it's clear that some districts are already fighting back. But it'll be interesting to see if suits of this nature will be a new weapon in the arsenal.

Posted by Christina Samuels at 5:02 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Jim Gerl, who writes at the Special Education Law Blog, has a recent post about President Obama signing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities last week. (The Senate still has to ratify the convention before it would apply to this country.)

Gerl asks:

...I am wondering whether this treaty might be argued as additional authority in special education due process hearings in the U.S....

...Article 24 deals more directly with education and states that countries "... are to ensure equal access to primary and secondary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning. Education is to employ the appropriate materials, techniques and forms of communication. Pupils with support needs are to receive support measures, and pupils who are blind, deaf and deaf-blind are to receive their education in the most appropriate modes of communication from teachers who are fluent in sign language and Braille.

My response to his blog post was that there is already a provision in the regulations accompanying the Individuals with Disabilites Education Act that says parents and teachers must consider teaching Braille and sign language to students who are blind or deaf. The treaty appears to state that students must be taught Braille and sign language, not that those modes of communication should merely be "considered."

But I'm not sure that there would be a way to enforce this. Any thoughts?

Posted by Christina Samuels at 4:25 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Education Secretary Arne Duncan wrote a letter to state schools chiefs dated July 31, asking them to review their current policies on restraint and seclusion.

Duncan's comments on this issue come in the way of a May hearing on restraints and seclusion that was held before the House education committee. He also uses the letter to give a pat on the back to Illinois:

My home State of Illinois has what I believe to be one good approach, including both a strong focus upon Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) as well as State regulations that limit the use of seclusion and restraint under most circumstances.

...The State’s requirements, which I found to be extremely helpful as chief executive officer of the Chicago Public Schools, were described in testimony at the hearing. Illinois prohibits the use of seclusion or restraint for the purpose of punishment or exclusion, and allows trained staff to restrain students only in narrow circumstances.

Duncan isn't giving states too much time to make changes to policies, if they're needed:

I have asked Fran Walter of our Office of Elementary and Secondary Education to work with staff from our regional Comprehensive Centers to contact your office by August 15, to discuss the status of your State’s efforts with regard to limiting the use of seclusion and restraint to protect our students. During this contact, we expect to discuss relevant State laws, regulations, policies, and guidance that affect the use of seclusion and restraint, and any plans for further development or revisions.

I wonder if any changes will be made in California or Texas, two states singled out for particular attention in a recent federal report that examined cases of restraint and seclusion nationwide.

(Hat-tip to the Justice for All blog and the EBD blog)

Posted by Christina Samuels at 4:40 PM | Permalink | 4 Comments | Recommend