Roger Holt's Library tagged IDEA →  View Popular, Search in Google

The Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Act (IDEA) is an example of a statute that has achieved its noble mission but now urgently needs to be  fixed in order to address its unintended consequences. 

 

  Enacted in 1975, IDEA requires schools to provide students with certain disabilities with an entitlement to a "free appropriate public education" in  the "least restrictive environment." Today it covers more than 6 million students. And while America can be proud that so many children have done well  under IDEA, special education services now consume well over 20 percent of school budgets -- a staggering amount that constrains available resources  and opportunities for the rest of the student population. 

This week, U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, testified before the Appropriations Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives. His words and outlook for the future of special education funding were bleak.

The Response-to-Intervention (RtI) movement is enabling public education in the United States to evolve from a reactive model in which students had to seriously deteriorate before being moved on to special education programs, to one that emphasizes early and high-quality research-based interventions in regular programs that generate useful data with which to make key decisions for each struggling student. This evolution, however, has taken place against a backdrop of legal requirements for special education referrals and evaluations that remain almost unchanged from those of more than 30 years ago. The meeting of RtI innovations and the traditional child-find requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) has many scratching their heads over exactly how the rules fit into the modern intervention era. Both the misconceptions that have become commonplace, as well as the legal disputes created by this juncture, make one wonder whether we truly grasp the fundamental child-find obligation of the IDEA in its present context.

The Response-to-Intervention (RtI) movement is enabling public education in the United States to evolve from a reactive model in which students had to seriously deteriorate before being moved on to special education programs, to one that emphasizes early and high-quality research-based interventions in regular programs that generate useful data with which to make key decisions for each struggling student. This evolution, however, has taken place against a backdrop of legal requirements for special education referrals and evaluations that remain almost unchanged from those of more than 30 years ago. The meeting of RtI innovations and the traditional child-find requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) has many scratching their heads over exactly how the rules fit into the modern intervention era. Both the misconceptions that have become commonplace, as well as the legal disputes created by this juncture, make one wonder whether we truly grasp the fundamental child-find obligation of the IDEA in its present context.

As an older sibling of someone with developmental disabilities, I want to believe that my sister will have better options than exist today. Policies such as IDEA and NCLB were founded on philosophies derived from civil rights and an individual’s pursuit of happiness. These are meant to provide a semblance of equality and possibility for individuals with disabilities to grow and achieve their full potential. My sister, however, will never be able to fight for her happiness on her own. The state will always see her as a burden, and she will rely on a community to support and protect her.

the OSEP Spanish Glossary, has been developed to ensure that educational terms related to the implementation of IDEA used in documents to promote and parents’ authentic participation are translated in a uniform and comprehensible way, across states, geographical regions and communities of Spanish speakers.

This video was produced by the U.S. Department of Education for the 35th Anniversary Celebration of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

More than 30 years after passage of the Individuals With Disabilities

Education Act, schools are still working on including students with disabilities in all facets of public school. And in many places, they remain segregated for at least part of the day, says Wayne Sailor.

  

"This has been a major uphill battle," Mr. Sailor, a professor of special education at the University of Kansas, told a group gathered in Arlington, Va., this week during a conference hosted by the U.S. Department of Education's office of special education programs.

As I have travelled across the country visiting schools and classrooms and talking with teachers and parents, I have heard many questions about our plans at the U.S. Department of Education to support children with disabilities, their families, and the teachers who educate them and fight for them daily. To hear more about the issues affecting students with disabilities and their teachers, I asked CEC to contact members through an e-mail blast. Your response was overwhelming. Though CEC received more questions than we could possibly answer here, I have worked with your leadership to identify some of the central questions for educators of children with disabilities, and I have worked with my staff at the Department so that we can address them in this document.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday asked the Obama administration for its views on whether a parent may bring a negligence claim against a school district that allegedly failed to identify a high school student's disabilities.

  

The justices asked the U.S. solicitor general's office to weigh in on the issue raised under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan vowed Tuesday to abolish the so-called "2 percent rule" that obscures an accurate portrait of the academic needs of America's students with disabilities.

  

In prepared remarks to the American Association of People with Disabilities gala in Washington, Duncan declared that students with disabilities should be judged with the same accountability system as everyone else.

A parent had a question. She said she did not agree with the school's proposed IEP, the school refused to change the IEP, so she needed to file for due process. Her advocate advised that she could not file for due process until after the school provided Prior Written Notice (PWN).

She was right. She could have requested the due process hearing when the dispute arose, without waiting months for the school to respond.

“I’m advocating for greater alignment between ESEA and IDEA. Alignment does not mean the merger of IDEA and ESEA. Nor does it represent any intention whatsoever to diminish or weaken IDEA as a unique and freestanding civil rights statute. … The reauthorization of ESEA and IDEA will create an opportunity for a paradigm shift that will allow us to define one educational system, while also refining our policies and practices to make certain that we educate all students to the highest possible standards,” said Posny.

This is the 29th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2007. Section 664(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as reauthorized in 2004, requires that the Department of Education report annually on the progress made toward the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to all children with disabilities and the provision of early intervention services to infants and toddlers with disabilities.

In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.

On November 29, 1975, then-President Gerald Ford signed into law the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142).

  

In adopting this landmark civil rights measure, Congress opened public school doors for millions of children with disabilities and laid the foundation of the country’s commitment to ensuring that children with disabilities have opportunities to develop their talents, share their gifts, and contribute to their communities.

The U.S. Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, Public Law (P.L.) 94 142, in 1975. This landmark law—together with subsequent amendments as currently reflected in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; P.L. 108-446)—supports states and localities in protecting the rights of, meeting the individual needs of, and improving results for infants, toddlers, children, and youths with disabilities and their families.