Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Improving public policy advocacy through the effective use of data.

Improving public policy advocacy through the effective use of data. The focus for most consumers of federal education program servicesis the end product. Of concern to these consumers--students, teachers,and principals --are the quality of the service, the timeliness of theservice delivery, and the relevance of the services to the particularneed. To ensure that federal education programs can be effective forchildren attending private schools, it is critical to be activelyinvolved in the legislative process. This article explores an attempt tochange and improve a federal education program for Catholic and otherprivate school participants, highlighting the key role in the lobbyingprocess played by high quality, timely data. ********** When the federal government first began funding programs forelementary and secondary education in 1965, the goal was to supplementstates and localities in areas of acute need. Education for thedisadvantaged--known as Title I--was the central focus of the newfederal inroad in��road?n.1. A hostile invasion; a raid.2. An advance, especially at another's expense; an encroachment. Often used in the plural: Foreign products have made inroads into the American economy. into the elementary and secondary education arena. Overthe years, federal education programs have targeted needs such as drugabuse, library materials, technology and telecommunications Communicating information, including data, text, pictures, voice and video over long distance. See communications. , innovativeprograms, programs for gifted and talented students, teacher trainingand professional development, math and science education, and the broadcategory of supplementary educational materials. Most of these programsare authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act “Title I” redirects here. For other uses of "Title I", see Title I (disambiguation).The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) (Pub.L. 89-10, 79Stat.77, ) is a United States federal statute enacted April 111965. of 1965,most recently reauthorized as the No Child Left Behind Act The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110), commonly known as NCLB (IPA: /ˈnɪkəlbiː/), is a United States federal law that was passed in the House of Representatives on May 23, 2001 of 2001. Inmost programs authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act,private school students and teachers receive equitable equitableadj. 1) just, based on fairness and not legal technicalities. 2) refers to positive remedies (orders to do something, not money damages) employed by the courts to solve disputes or give relief. (See: equity) EQUITABLE. benefits to meettheir needs. One key aspect of elementary and secondary education not covered not coveredHealth care adjective Referring to a procedure, test or other health service to which a policy holder or insurance beneficiary is not entitled under the terms of the policy or payment system–eg, Medicare. Cf Covered. bythe Elementary and Secondary Education Act is the provision of specialeducation and related services. The Individuals With DisabilitiesEducation Act This article or section is currently being developed or reviewed.Some statements may be disputed, incorrect, , biased or otherwise objectionable. Amendments of 1997, known as IDEA, is a grant program toassist states in providing a "free appropriate publiceducation," often referred to as FAPE FAPE Free Appropriate Public EducationFAPE Families and Advocates Partnership for EducationFAPE Fund for Assistance to Private Education (Makati City, the Philippines)FAPE Florida Association of Partners in Education , in the least restrictiveenvironment As part of the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the least restrictive environment is identified as one of the six principles that govern the education of students with disabilities. for children with disabilities ages 3 through 21. IDEA alsoauthorizes early intervention ear��ly interventionn. Abbr. EIA process of assessment and therapy provided to children, especially those younger than age 6, to facilitate normal cognitive and emotional development and to prevent developmental disability or delay. services for infants and toddlers birththrough age 2 and their families, and provides funding for nationalprograms, research, and activities. The funds for the state grantprogram are awarded to states on the basis of a formula that takes intoaccount the numbers of K-12 public and private school students, K-12public and private school students living in poverty, and K-12 publicand private school students with disabilities. PRIVATE SCHOOL STUDENTS AND IDEA IDEA is considered both an education law and a civil rightsguarantee. Every child suspected of having a disability must be located,identified, and evaluated by the local public school district.Additionally, the guarantee of a free, appropriate public educationensures that any child found to have a disability will be given aneducation by the public school district designed to meet his or herunique educational needs. In addition to guaranteeing an appropriateeducation to every child with a disability, it also attempts to guideschool districts in the best way to educate a child with a disability.For example, the law contains requirements for serving children withdisabilities in the least restrictive environment, steps to take indisciplining children with disabilities, and the provision of assistanceto children with disabilities in the regular classroom. IDEA also hasextensive requirements that protect the rights of children withdisabilities and provide recourse The right of an individual who is holding a Commercial Paper, such as a check or promissory note, to receive payment on it from anyone who has signed it if the individual who originally made it is unable, or refuses, to tender payment. to parents if they believe theirchildren's rights The opportunity for children to participate in political and legal decisions that affect them; in a broad sense, the rights of children to live free from hunger, abuse, neglect, and other inhumane conditions. have been violated vi��o��late?tr.v. vi��o��lat��ed, vi��o��lat��ing, vi��o��lates1. To break or disregard (a law or promise, for example).2. To assault (a person) sexually.3. . Most of these provisions,however, only apply to children attending public schools--thosereceiving a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Children attending private schools who are suspected of having adisability have fewer rights and protections under IDEA. These childrenmust be offered an evaluation by the public school district and, iffound to have a disability, must be offered a free, appropriateeducation through the public schools. To receive a free, appropriatepublic education the parents of a private school child usually musttransfer the child with a disability into the public school system. Manyparents of private school children with disabilities, however, prefer tokeep the child--regardless of disability--in the private school settingthat they have already chosen. If they continue to enroll their childwith a disability in the private school, the law assumes the parentshave refused the public school district's offer of servicesconstituting a free, appropriate public education. In this case, thepublic school district no longer has an obligation to the individualchild with a disability in the private school, but continues to have anobligation to the group of private school children with disabilities toserve their needs with the federal portion of the funding. Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (sometimes referred to using the acronyms EAHCA or EHA, or Public Law (PL) 94-142) was enacted by the United States Congress in 1975. in1975. This was the precursor precursor/pre��cur��sor/ (pre��kur-ser) something that precedes. In biological processes, a substance from which another, usually more active or mature, substance is formed. In clinical medicine, a sign or symptom that heralds another. to IDEA. At the time, Congress promised tohelp defray de��fray?tr.v. de��frayed, de��fray��ing, de��fraysTo undertake the payment of (costs or expenses); pay.[French d��frayer, from Old French desfrayer : des-, the cost of compliance by gradually increasing the federalfunding to equal 40% of the excess cost of educating children withdisabilities. However, even at the signing of the bill in 1975, therewas doubt about the ability of the federal government to financiallysupport the requirements. President Gerald Gerald - ["Gerald: An Exceptional Lazy Functional Programming Language", A.C. Reeves et al, in Functional Programming, Glasgow 1989, K. Davis et al eds, Springer 1990]. R. Ford, when signing thebill into law stated, Despite my strong support for full educational opportunities for our handicapped children, the funding levels proposed in this bill will simply not be possible if Federal expenditures are to be brought under control and a balanced budget achieved over the next few years. There are other features in the bill which I believe to be objectionable and which should be changed. It contains a vast array of detailed, complex, and costly administrative requirements which would unnecessarily assert Federal control over traditional State and local government functions. It establishes complex requirements under which tax dollars would be used to support administrative paperwork and not educational programs. Unfortunately, these requirements will remain in effect even though the Congress appropriates far less than the amounts contemplated in S. 6. (1975, para. 4-5) Now, 29 years later, Congress is barely funding 20% of the excesscost of educating children with disabilities, although attempts arebeing made to continue to increase the federal commitment.Unfortunately, it is only this federal portion of special educationfunding that pays for IDEA services to private school children withdisabilities. Therefore, the funds through which private school childrenwith disabilities receive federal IDEA services are very limited. It isunlikely, therefore, that every child in private schools determined tohave a disability will be fully served by federal IDEA funds. It shouldbe noted, however, that some states have state-funded programs thatextend additional services to private school children with disabilities. Those working on public policy issues have heard anecdotally foryears that private school children with disabilities were not adequatelyevaluated, were refused services, were given poor quality services, orhad their services disrupted dis��rupt?tr.v. dis��rupt��ed, dis��rupt��ing, dis��rupts1. To throw into confusion or disorder: Protesters disrupted the candidate's speech.2. mid-stream through IDEA. Catholic schooleducators often found the IDEA process so frustrating frus��trate?tr.v. frus��trat��ed, frus��trat��ing, frus��trates1. a. To prevent from accomplishing a purpose or fulfilling a desire; thwart: and yielding sofew results that they turned to other ways to have children evaluatedand served. With years of stories about the lack of IDEA services,public policy advocates approached members of Congress and their staffsin the hope of making needed changes in IDEA. But all too often, theinitial response was, "Why are you concerned with IDEA? Youdon't even have children with disabilities in your schools."Clearly, policymakers needed education about Catholic schools andservices to children with disabilities. DATA ON CATHOLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES The United States United States,officially United States of America, republic (2005 est. pop. 295,734,000), 3,539,227 sq mi (9,166,598 sq km), North America. The United States is the world's third largest country in population and the fourth largest country in area. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB USCCB United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (Washington, DC)) determinedthat accurate data were needed in order to make the case for changes inthe law. The first step was to build awareness that Catholic schoolsserve children with disabilities. To this end, USCCB surveyed everyCatholic diocese DIOCESE, eccl. law. The district over which a bishop exercises his spiritual functions. 1 B1. Com. 111. to ask about services in Catholic schools and religiouseducation programs for children with disabilities. The survey includedlisting the disabilities currently being served and asking for adescription of any special programs being used to serve children withdisabilities. The result was the publication of the Special NeedsResource Directory: Let the Children Come to Me (USCCB, 2001), which wasdistributed to all members of Congress as well as to members of theprivate school and disability communities. The Directory illustrated theextent and breadth of programs and the geographical diversity inoffering services. The Directory is currently being updated to reflectchanges in program services for children with disabilities in Catholicschools and parish religious education programs. As a result, USCCB hadan informational source that answered the critics who incorrectlybelieved that Catholic schools did not serve children with disabilities. In using this resource in lobbying efforts, USCCB soon learned thatwhile this was an excellent start, specific data on children withdisabilities in Catholic schools and their access to IDEA services werevery much needed. It was at this point that USCCB commissioned a studythat was conducted by the Center for Educational Partnerships, anot-for-profit organization based in Chicago Chicago, city, United StatesChicago(shĭkä`gō, shĭkô`gō), city (1990 pop. 2,783,726), seat of Cook co., NE Ill., on Lake Michigan; inc. 1837. . The resulting study,Catholic School Students with Disabilities, uses data from two Catholicschool-based surveys and follow-up follow-up,n the process of monitoring the progress of a patient after a period of active treatment.follow-upsubsequent.follow-up plan phone interviews with school leadersand parents. Local and state education authorities were also contacted.The following primary questions were addressed: 1. To what extent are children diagnosed with disabilities presentin Catholic schools? 2. Given the IDEA statute, regulations, and guidance, how does theChild Find process (evaluation to determine a disability) operate forCatholic school children suspected of having a disability? 3. What is the manner and to what extent do Catholic schoolstudents with disabilities receive special education and relatedservices? (USCCB, 2002a, p. 8) A nationally-representative sample of dioceses was selected forthis study, with over-sampling of the largest dioceses. The studysolicited the cooperation of the Catholic schools offices of thedioceses selected, who in turn provided contact information for allCatholic schools in their dioceses. The surveys were completed byofficials on the individual school level, and follow-up interviews wereconducted with school officials and Catholic school parents. Additionalphone contacts were made with state and local special educationofficials to request information on how to get help for a private schoolchild suspected of having a disability. The full study sample consistedof 2,864 schools representing 1,004,886 children. The schools werelocated within 21 states and 32 dioceses. The first survey was conductedon-line and provided the base for the follow-up survey, which was mailedto participants and was designed to clarify and supplement the initialsurvey. The dates of the study, from initial contact through receipt ofthe final survey, were from December 2001 through June 2002. Standardresearch practices were followed in the coding, data entry, filebuilding, and preparation of cross-tabulations, involving multiplequality assurance steps. More than 75% of school officials chosen for the study responded tothe initial on-line survey. Thirty percent provided 100% useable data.The survey response rate for the Part II follow-up survey was 97.89% ofthe schools initially surveyed, including those reached throughsubsequent phone calls for additional clarification. The findings from the study tell a compelling story about thespecial education needs of Catholic school children, how Catholicschools have responded to those needs, and the problems parents ofCatholic school children with disabilities have in accessing anyservices through IDEA. The following are the Key Findings from the study, taken from FactSheets prepared for distribution to policymakers (Doyle & Maclean,2003). Finding #1: Catholic schools serve special needs children in alldisability areas. Catholic School Students with Disabilities (USCCB, 2002a) foundthat approximately 7% of children enrolled in Catholic schools arechildren with disabilities, as compared to 11.4% of children withdisabilities enrolled in public schools. Moreover, children in Catholicschools with disabilities are representative of all disability areas. When comparing disability types, Catholic schools enroll a greaterpercentage of children diagnosed with hearing impairment hearing impairmentn.A reduction or defect in the ability to perceive sound. or deafness,developmental delay, deafness and blindness, traumatic brain injury Traumatic brain injury (TBI), traumatic injuries to the brain, also called intracranial injury, or simply head injury, occurs when a sudden trauma causes brain damage. TBI can result from a closed head injury or a penetrating head injury and is one of two subsets of acquired brain , andother health impairments than public schools. Finding #2: The Child Find process is inconsistent and difficult toaccess for parents of children attending Catholic schools and suspectedof having a disability. Catholic School Students with Disabilities (USCCB, 2002a) foundthat the implementation of the Child Find process for children inCatholic schools is fragmented frag��ment?n.1. A small part broken off or detached.2. An incomplete or isolated portion; a bit: overheard fragments of their conversation; extant fragments of an old manuscript.3. at best and inhospitable in��hos��pi��ta��ble?adj.1. Displaying no hospitality; unfriendly.2. Unfavorable to life or growth; hostile: the barren, inhospitable desert. to children withdisabilities whose parents enroll them in Catholic schools. The interpretation of the process for identifying private schoolchildren with disabilities depends on the interpretation at the locallevel and often deviates from federal law and guidance as well aswritten state and local education department policies. Clearly, although Child Find should make an evaluation available toprivate school children suspected of having a disability, it is poorlyadministered and often seems designed to exclude parents whose childrenare not in public schools. As a result, many children suspected ofhaving a disability are not evaluated through the Child Find process. The inconsistency in��con��sis��ten��cy?n. pl. in��con��sis��ten��cies1. The state or quality of being inconsistent.2. Something inconsistent: many inconsistencies in your proposal. in the Child Find process calls into questionwhether or not the data on number and percentage of children withdisabilities in Catholic schools is undercounted because of systemic systemic/sys��tem��ic/ (sis-tem��ik) pertaining to or affecting the body as a whole. sys��tem��icadj.1. Of or relating to a system.2. problems with the Child Find process. We cannot know this for certainthrough the study, but this finding points to undercounting as apotential result of Child Find as it is currently administered forprivate school children. Finding #3: Catholic school children are less likely to bediagnosed with a disability by a public school evaluator than through aprivate evaluator. The study found that not only is the Child Find process confusing con��fuse?v. con��fused, con��fus��ing, con��fus��esv.tr.1. a. To cause to be unable to think with clarity or act with intelligence or understanding; throw off.b. ,unwelcoming, and inconsistently administered for children attendingCatholic schools and suspected of having a disability, but Catholicschool children are less likely to be diagnosed with a disability by apublic school evaluation than through a private evaluator. * Six percent of Catholic school students suspected of having adisability and referred to public school evaluators were denied anevaluation. * Seventy-two percent of Catholic school students tested throughthe public schools were diagnosed with a disability. * Catholic school students, who were denied an evaluation or wereevaluated by the public schools and found not to have a disability, werefrequently evaluated outside of the public school system. Of these twogroups of students, 90% were found to have a disability by a privateevaluator. The percentage of students diagnosed as not having a disability bypublic school evaluators is higher than the percentage of studentsdiagnosed as not having a disability by private evaluators. Individualcases of preferred tests may be an issue for some schools, butrespondents In the context of marketing research, a representative sample drawn from a larger population of people from whom information is collected and used to develop or confirm marketing strategy. did not indicate a vast difference between the types andfrequencies of the tests administered by evaluators. Survey respondentslisted the tests most commonly used by public school evaluators andprivate evaluators. Both lists included the Wechsler Intelligence Scalefor Children Wechsler intelligence scale for childrenn.A standardized intelligence test that is used for assessing children from 5 to 15 years old. and the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery as thetwo most commonly used tests. Doyle/IMPROVING PUBLIC POLICY THROUGH THEEFFECTIVE USE OF DATA 77 Therefore, variation of tests administered bypublic and private evaluators does not appear to explain the differencein findings of disabilities. Finding #4: Catholic school children with disabilities appear to beenrolled in roughly the same proportion by ethnicity ethnicityVox populi Racial status–ie, African American, Asian, Caucasian, Hispanic as theirnon-disabled peers. One issue being examined as Congress looks to re-authorize IDEA isthe over-identification of minority children as disabled. In 1998, approximately 1.5 million minority children wereidentified as having mental retardation mental retardation,below average level of intellectual functioning, usually defined by an IQ of below 70 to 75, combined with limitations in the skills necessary for daily living. , emotional disturbance DISTURBANCE, torts. A wrong done to an incorporeal hereditament, by hindering or disquieting the owner in the enjoyment of it. Finch. L. 187; 3 Bl. Com. 235; 1 Swift's Dig. 522; Com. Dig. Action upon the case for a disturbance, Pleader, 3 I 6; 1 Serg. & Rawle, 298. , or aspecific learning disability. Compared to White children, AfricanAmerican African AmericanMulticulture A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.See Race. children (in data from 1997) were almost three times morelikely to be labeled "mentally retarded Noun 1. mentally retarded - people collectively who are mentally retarded; "he started a school for the retarded"developmentally challenged, retarded " (Civil RightsProject, 2000). Catholic School Students with Disabilities (USCCB, 2002a) foundthat Catholic school children with disabilities appear to be enrolled inroughly the same proportion by ethnicity as their non-disabled peers. Finding #5: Catholic school students diagnosed as having adisability are not receiving services through IDEA sufficient toadequately address their disability. Catholic School Students with Disabilities (USCCB, 2002a) foundthat less than 1% (0.74) of Catholic school children diagnosed withdisabilities receives services funded through IDEA. Because IDEA funds are so limited, they are usually directed todisabilities needing less intervention A procedure used in a lawsuit by which the court allows a third person who was not originally a party to the suit to become a party, by joining with either the plaintiff or the defendant. and a lower level of service.Eighty-eight percent of IDEA services to children with disabilities inCatholic schools are provided to children with speech/language disordersor learning disabilities. Although more than 28% of children in Catholicschools have disabilities in other areas, such as emotional disturbance,autism autism(ô`tĭzəm), developmental disability resulting from a neurological disorder that affects the normal functioning of the brain. It is characterized by the abnormal development of communication skills, social skills, and reasoning. , and developmental delay, these children receive only 12% of theservices. When breaking down how the cost of special education and relatedservices is paid, the study shows that public funds See Fund, 3.See also: Public pay for 50% of thecosts. Because parentally-placed private school students are notentitled en��ti��tle?tr.v. en��ti��tled, en��ti��tling, en��ti��tles1. To give a name or title to.2. To furnish with a right or claim to something: to special education and related services if they remain intheir private school, parents must find a way to pay for the remaining50% of service costs. The study shows that of the 50% not paid by state,local, or IDEA funds, 68% of the cost is assumed in the cost of regulartuition For tuition fees in the United Kingdom, see .Tuition means instruction, teaching or a fee charged for educational instruction especially at a formal institution of learning or by a private tutor usually in the form of one-to-one tuition. charged by Catholic schools and 30% is paid by parents inaddition to their regular tuition at the Catholic school. Finding #6: Catholic school teachers, counselors, andadministrators utilize innovative strategies for accommodating studentswith disabilities, even in the absence of IDEA services. The study found that Catholic school children diagnosed with adisability receive services primarily through resource room/pulloutprograms and in-classroom accommodations. In fact, 34% of all servicesprovided to disabled students enrolled in Catholic schools are fundedthrough Catholic school tuition. Preferred seating, test taking accommodations, and individualclassroom help were identified as the most common form of delivery typefor children receiving services. Additionally, schools define resources used to serve students witha disability to include faculty members offering individual assistanceand providing the flexibility required to accommodate special needs inthe classroom. Some schools also respond to the needs of the disabledstudents by providing a highly structured daily schedule, reducing thespace in which the student works, and adjusting requirements. IDEA Legislation As a result of the findings and the data supporting them, changeshave been made in IDEA as passed by the House of Representatives (H.R.1350, 2003) and Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, andPensions (S. 1248, 2003). The full Senate is expected to take up IDEAreauthorization in 2004. Many improvements have been added to IDEA to better serve childrenwith disabilities who attend private schools. Both the reauthorizationas passed by the House and the version reported by Committee to the fullSenate require that federal funding for students with disabilities inprivate schools be proportionate pro��por��tion��ate?adj.Being in due proportion; proportional.tr.v. pro��por��tion��at��ed, pro��por��tion��at��ing, pro��por��tion��atesTo make proportionate. to the federal funding for publicschool students with disabilities. Too often in the past, only verylimited services were funded for private school children withdisabilities. The language also requires a thorough and complete ChildFind to identify children with disabilities who attend private schools.Parents found that Child Find--the process of evaluations to determineif the child is a child with a disability--was difficult to access. Thestudy found that, in 6% of the cases, parents were refused access to theChild Find process for their child (USCCB, 2002a). The legislation further specifies that the cost of Child Find isseparate from the proportionate funding generated by children withdisabilities in private schools. For example, some districts wouldconduct Child Find and then inform parents that there were no funds leftfor providing services. Finally, in regard to Child Find, thelegislation requires consultation between public and private schoolofficials on the process of Child Find. This consultation must includewhere and when the Child Find will take place and how parents can accessit. Hopefully, this will make Child Find more accessible to privateschool parents. One very significant change to IDEA by both the House ofRepresentatives and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor,and Pensions is to change the entity that is responsible for Child Find,counting children with disabilities, and serving children withdisabilities who attend private schools. The legislation changes theresponsibility for the child count, funding, and services from thepublic school district (known in legislation as the local educationalagency or the LEA LEA LeagueLEA Local Education Authority (UK)LEA Local Education AgencyLEA Langues ��trang��res Appliqu��es (France)LEA Law Enforcement AgencyLEA Load Effective Address ) in which the child resides to the public schooldistrict in which the private school is located. This change requiresthat the local public school district in which the private school islocated be responsible for providing services to private school childrenwith disabilities, regardless of where the individual children mayreside. In the past, a single Catholic school might need to interactwith several public school districts. Additionally, districts had no wayof knowing which private schools located outside of the districtboundaries their residents might be attending. This also made itdifficult for districts to provide on-site services for private schoolchildren with disabilities because their residents were often attendingmultiple private schools inside and outside of the public schooldistrict. In making this change the Senate Health, Education, Labor, andPensions Committee noted: Finally, in an effort to streamline and simplify the provision of services to parentally-placed private school children with disabilities, the bill stipulates that the LEA in which the private school is located is responsible for ensuring equitable services. This stipulation protects LEAs from having to work with private schools located in multiple jurisdictions when students attend private schools across district lines. (S. Rep. No. 108-185, 2003, pp. 15-16) The House and the Senate bills both require recordkeeping by thelocal public school districts on the numbers of private school childrenevaluated, determined to have a disability, and served by IDEA. Thereason it was necessary for USCCB to commission a survey was becausesufficient data were not available nationally, making private schoolchildren with disabilities an invisible population. Additionally,without regular reporting of data, it is more difficult to monitorprogram implementation. Over the years, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act has beenmodified to further specify the requirements for consultation betweenpublic and private school officials. No Child Left Behind improvedconsultation procedures even further. The result has been more equitableprograms and a process of recourse for private school officials if theirstudents are not receiving equitable services. The House IDEAreauthorization bill, to some extent, and the Senate Committeereauthorization bill, to a greater extent, mirror the No Child LeftBehind Act requirements. Specifically, the language on consultationbetween public and private school officials requires that theconsultation be ongoing and deal with how, where, and by whom theservices will be provided, include a discussion of alternate deliverymechanisms, and determine how funds will be apportioned ap��por��tion?tr.v. ap��por��tioned, ap��por��tion��ing, ap��por��tionsTo divide and assign according to a plan; allot: "The tendency persists to apportion blame as suits the circumstances"if they areinsufficient to serve all children with disabilities. Procedures in NoChild Left Behind have been in place in various forms for more than 30years. District and private school officials have developedrelationships for other federal programs, so extending them to specialeducation makes sense. The House established a complaint procedure forprivate school officials to appeal to the Secretary of Education, andthe Senate extended that procedure to authorize the Secretary toinitiate a bypass of the local district if it was either unable orunwilling to provide equitable services to private school children withdisabilities. Both the House and the Senate allow the public school district toprovide services through contracting with a third party provider. ManyCatholic school leaders look to third party providers as entities thatunderstand the law and have an incentive to provide a high qualityprogram to private school children. Both bills require that theprovision of services through a third party contractor be part of theconsultation process. The Senate adds an additional requirement that thepublic school district provide a written explanation to the privateschool officials if it does not use a third party provider whenrequested by the private school officials. The Senate bill gives greater emphasis on the time line betweenreferral for an evaluation and completion of the Child Find process,requiring that private school children be evaluated along the same timeline as public school children. Too often, when private school childrenwere evaluated, they were evaluated after the public schoolchildren's evaluations were completed. It was often spring, andnear the end of the school year, before fall referrals of private schoolchildren were completed. As a result, the child suspected of having adisability lost most of a school year, during which appropriateinterventions could have been made had a diagnosis been completed. In addition, the Senate adds a sign-off by private school officialson the consultation process and requires that the local public schooldistrict consider the views of the private school officials beforemaking a final decision on services. The sign-off is the currentpractice in Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the for details.This article has been tagged since September 2007. ,Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and is also thepractice of several states. Those who have used it report that asign-off makes the process clear and results in better and more timelyservices to children. One final significant change to note is that the Senate requiresthat services be provided directly to private school children withdisabilities, rather than providing an indirect service such asconsultative services to the private school teacher. The study foundthat less than 1% of private school children found to have a disabilitywere provided with direct services under IDEA. This piece of data wasvery persuasive to policymakers. As a result, the Senate added arequirement that, whenever practicable practicableadj. when something can be done or performed. , IDEA services should be provideddirectly to the child with a disability. While the House did not specifydirect service language in its version, the House report detailed theintent of members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. First, the bill clarifies that the proportional amount of money obliged to be used to provide special education and related services to children in the State with disabilities who have been placed by their parents in private schools must be used to provide some direct services. The Committee expects that the majority of the funds expended for this purpose will be for direct services, while the remainder may be used for indirect services such as professional development of private school teachers to work with children with disabilities and counseling to assist private school personnel in meeting the needs of the child with a disability. (H.R. Rep. No. 108-177, 2003, p. 94) EFFECTIVE USE OF DATA These changes--which together should begin to change the wayprivate school children with disabilities are treated under IDEA--wouldnot have been possible without good data. And good data are not possibleunless Catholic school administrators take time out of their alreadybusy schedules to accurately complete survey forms. In addition to gathering good data, researchers must find ways andcreate outlets to make good use of the data. Catholic schooladministrators may be understandably reluctant to take the time toprovide information about their school and students if they do not see apractical use of the data to benefit their schools in a way thatjustifies the time and effort needed to complete the survey. Useful datacan inform an issue, such as what constitutes successful professionaldevelopment programs or how best to teach at-risk children. Studies canprovide basic information about schools and students, allowing the datauser to compare and contrast his or her own school community with thelarger community. Basic statistical studies provide baseline The horizontal line to which the bottoms of lowercase characters (without descenders) are aligned. See typeface. baseline - released version data todescribe the types of schools studied. Studies such as Catholic SchoolStudents with Disabilities (USCCB, 2002a) can inform the public aboutCatholic schools and students, and hopefully impact public policy in apositive way. To ensure that the data from Catholic School Students withDisabilities (USCCB, 2002a) got into the hands of policymakers, resultswere communicated frequently to members of Congress. The chairmen andmembers of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and theSenate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions received acopy of the study and key findings from it. The study was distributedand results presented in a briefing to staff members of both of thesecommittees. In addition, all members of Congress received a series ofsix Fact Sheets (Doyle & Maclean, 2003) on the study'sfindings. These Fact Sheets were also used for a variety of otherpurposes, as a quick way to focus on the key results of the study. The results of the study were used extensively with theAdministration. White House officials and Department of Education staffwere all briefed on the findings. Preliminary results were used intestimony before the President's Commission on Excellence inSpecial Education (USCCB, 2002c) and in written comments in the form ofan IDEA Options paper (USCCB, 2002b) that were submitted in response toa Federal Register notice regarding the reauthorization of IDEA. Periodically, through the process of reauthorization, localCatholic school leaders were sent "Action Alerts" on issues ofconcern to them. These Action Alerts relied on data from the study toprovide Catholic school leaders with the basic knowledge they needed toaccurately discuss the issues with their members of Congress and gavelocal Catholic education leaders the opportunity to add their ownexperiences with IDEA to the data from the study. Additionally, other private school organizations coalesced aroundthe data because, although the study looked only at Catholic schoolstudents with disabilities, it validated val��i��date?tr.v. val��i��dat��ed, val��i��dat��ing, val��i��dates1. To declare or make legally valid.2. To mark with an indication of official sanction.3. the information received by theother private school organizations--most of it anecdotal--from theirschool leaders and parents. In turn, these stories personalized per��son��al��ize?tr.v. per��son��al��ized, per��son��al��iz��ing, per��son��al��iz��es1. To take (a general remark or characterization) in a personal manner.2. To attribute human or personal qualities to; personify. the dataresults on Catholic school students with disabilities and helpedpolicymakers see the data as reflective Refers to light hitting an opaque surface such as a printed page or mirror and bouncing back. See reflective media and reflective LCD. of a larger community of privateschool children with disabilities. In an excellent example of how well-known the results of the studyhad become, the Secretary of Education, Rod Paige Roderick Raynor "Rod" Paige (born June 17, 1933), served as the 7th United States Secretary of Education from 2001 to 2005. Paige, who grew up in Mississippi, built a career on a belief that education equalizes opportunity, moving from college dean and school superintendent to be , in writing to membersof the Coalition on Equity in Special Education (a coalition of 13private school organizations formed around the issue of IDEAreauthorization, of which USCCB and the National Catholic EducationalAssociation are members), stated: While the Department does not collect statistics on the number of children in private schools who have disabilities, a report published by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in November 2002 reports that seven percent of children in Catholic schools (which enroll about half of the private school students in the U.S.) have been diagnosed as having disabilities, and these students represent the full range of disability type. The report found that less than one percent of children with disabilities in Catholic schools receive services funded by IDEA, and also identified problems with child find, consultation, and other areas. (R. Paige, personal communication, April 7, 2003) Finally, Education Week, following the passage of the House versionof IDEA reauthorization, noted the efforts of the Coalition for Equityin Special Education and wrote that the United States Conference ofCatholic Bishops, in a study commissioned in the fall of 2002, learnedthat "only 1% of students with disabilities at Catholic schools arereceiving services paid for under IDEA" (Zehr, 2003, p. 25). Throughout the course of this effort, additional statistics onCatholic schools and their students were used effectively. Data from theNational Center for Education Statistics (2001) were invaluable inestablishing benchmarks for enrollment in Catholic schools.Additionally, the data bank maintained by the National CatholicEducational Association (McDonald, 2003) provided vital information onCatholic schools and their students, including tuition data andinformation about students attending these schools. Without significantparticipation in data collection, public policy advocacy may not havethe tools needed to significantly impact legislation. CONCLUSION The work on IDEA is far from over. There are still efforts underwayto make further improvements to the language on service to privateschool students with disabilities prior to Senate passage and the billbeing signed into law. Even once IDEA is signed into law, much effortwill be needed to ensure that the new language translates into betterservices for private school children with disabilities. Not least amongfuture efforts is the need to continue to gather data on services toprivate school children with disabilities to monitor implementation andformulate formulate/for��mu��late/ (for��mu-lat)1. to state in the form of a formula.2. to prepare in accordance with a prescribed or specified method. additional improvements, grounded in good data, for the nextreauthorization. Public policy advocacy is a never-ending process ofimprovement, implementation, and analysis. Key to this process aretimely and reliable data. REFERENCES Civil Rights Project. (2000). Minority issues in special education.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Harvard University,mainly at Cambridge, Mass., including Harvard College, the oldest American college.Harvard CollegeHarvard College, originally for men, was founded in 1636 with a grant from the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Doyle, M. L., & Maclean, G. C. (2003). Key findings of IDEAsurvey. Retrieved March 31, 2004, fromhttp://www.usccb.org/education/fedasst/ideakey.htm Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, 20 U.S.C.[subsection subsectionNounany of the smaller parts into which a section may be dividedNoun 1. subsection - a section of a section; a part of a part; i.e. ] 1400-1491 (2000). Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-110,79 Stat. 27 (1965). Ford, G. R. (1975, December 2). Statement on signing the Educationfor All Handicapped Children Act. Retrieved March 29, 2004, fromUniversity of Texas Library Web site:http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/speeches/750707.htm H.R. 1350, 108th Cong. (2003). H.R. Rep (programming) REP - A directive used in IBM object code card decks (and later PTF Tapes) to REPlace fragments of already assembled or compiled object code prior to link edit. . No. 108-77 (2003). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20U.S.C. [subsection] 1400-1487 (2000). McDonald, D. (2003). United States Catholic elementary andsecondary schools 2002-2003: The annual statistical report on schools,enrollment, and staffing. Washington, DC: National Catholic EducationalAssociation. National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Private schooluniverse survey, 1999-2000. Washington, DC: United States Department ofEducation The United States Department of Education (also referred to as ED, for Education Department) is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government. Created by the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88), it began operating in 1980. . No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. [section] 6301 (Supp. I2001). S. 1248, 108th Cong. (2003). S. Rep. 108-185 (2003). United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2001). Special needsresource directory: Let the children come to me. Retrieved March 31,2004, from http://www.usccb.org/education/ fedasst/needs4.pdf United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2002a). Catholicschool students with disabilities. Retrieved March 31, 2004, fromhttp://www.usccb.org/education/fedasst/ideafinal.pdf United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2002b). IDEA optionspaper. Retrieved March 31, 2004, fromhttp://usccb.org/education/fedasst/options.pdf United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2002c). Statementpresented to the President's Commission on Excellence in SpecialEducation. Retrieved March 31, 2004, fromhttp://www.usccb.org/education/fedasst/commiss.pdf Zehr, M. A. (2003, May 14). Private schools pushing for IDEAchanges. Education Week, pp. 23, 25. MICHELLE MICHELLE Mid-Infrared Echelle Spectrograph L. DOYLE Office of Government Liaison United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Michelle L. Doyle serves as Associate Director of the Office ofGovernment Liaison at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishopsand is responsible for working with members of Congress and their staffon issues of concern to Catholic education. Correspondence concerningthis article should be addressed to Michelle L. Doyle, Office ofGovernment Liaison, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 3211Fourth Street NE, Washington, DC 20017-1194.Table 1Presence of Children Diagnosed with Disabilities Enrolled in CatholicSchools by Disability TypeDisability Percentage of Percentage children with of total disabilities in enrollment in Catholic schools Catholic schoolsMental retardation 1.16 0.08Hearing impairment or deafness 2.00 0.14Orthopedic 1.05 0.07Autism 0.75 0.05Emotional disturbance 3.03 0.21Developmentally delayed - aged 3.43 0.233-9 onlySpeech/language 26.93 1.84Uncorrected vision impairment 2.10 0.14including blindnessLearning disability 44.71 3.05Deaf and blind 0.67 0.05Traumatic brain injury 0.40 0.03Other health impairments 13.78 0.94Note: Total does not equal 100 due to rounding of the percentages.Table 2Presence of Children Diagnosed with Disabilities Enrolled in CatholicSchools and Public Schools by DisabilityDisability Percentage of Percentage of children with children with disabilities in disabilities in Catholic schools public schoolsMental retardation 1.16 10.81Hearing impairment or deafness 2.00 1.26Orthopedic 1.05 1.25Autism 0.75 1.15Emotional disturbance 3.03 8.27Developmentally delayed - aged 3.43 0.343-9 onlySpeech/language 26.93 19.18Uncorrected vision impairment 2.10 0.47including blindnessLearning disability 44.71 50.53Deaf and blind 0.67 0.03Traumatic brain injury 0.40 0.24Other health impairments 13.78 4.47Note: Totals do not equal 100 due to rounding of the percentages.Table 3Ethnicity of Catholic School Children with DisabilitiesEthnicity Percentage Percentage of Catholic of Catholic school enrollment for school enrollment children with disabilitiesCaucasian 74.4 79Hispanic 10.9 9African American 8 8Asian 3.9 3Other 2.8 1Total 100 100Figure 1. Special needs services for Catholic school students bydelivery typeResource 68%Room/PulloutProgramInclusive 28%EducationSeparate 4%SchoolResidential 0%HospitalNote: Table made from pie chart.

No comments:

Post a Comment