April 10, 2002
How new standards impact students with disabilities
New York Teacher questions SED about the support, resources teachers need
As the state phases in higher standards for all students, the landscape is changing for students with disabilities, their teachers and support staff.
Larry Gloeckler, the State Education Department's deputy commissioner for Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities, tackled related issues recently in an interview with New York Teacher.
What do you consider the most pressing issues regarding education reform and students with disabilities?
Teachers are concerned about assessments and where students with disabilities fit into them. Most people I talk to are very willing to embrace the idea that these kids should participate in the state's assessments - which is a federal requirement - and that many can do well, but they're looking for support. There's a lot of research that's been made available on reading and other curriculum areas that hasn't reached the teacher, and it's a shame. Teachers are hungry for proven methodologies, and yet we still have not had an effective way of getting to the teacher in the classroom. (See sidebar.)
Isn't that a responsibility of district leaders?
Today's climate in education requires a much stronger leader in the school district than perhaps in the past. A good leader involves all stakeholders. What we see in school districts is where you have strong leadership that's inclusive - brings people into the tent, if you will - involves staff from the get-go in planning, decision-making, curriculum alignment, things like that, you see a school district that's doing very well.
What is a school district's responsibility for professional development for teachers, teaching assistants and teacher aides under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act?
Specifically, each school district is required to have a Comprehensive System of Personnel Development, a plan for ongoing staff education. As far as a district's responsibility for staff development, it seems to me, if I were a school board member or a superintendent, I'd want to find as many resources as possible to put into staff development because it's an investment in your school. Staff development's got to be at the core of any district's ability to improve.
Is VESID playing a role in this staff development?
We've put a lot of our discretionary resources behind staff development. In the last several years, we've tried to target those resources through the Special Education Training and Resource Network to districts where the data shows the greatest need. Given our resources, we must focus on what's most important.
General education teachers tell us they need training to clarify their roles and responsibilities as members of the Committee on Special Education.
There is clearly a preference in federal law that students with disabilities be educated in general ed classrooms wherever possible, so the general ed teacher has to be involved in making decisions about the program. This is compounded by the large turnover in CSE membership. Every district should be making sure they have a well-trained committee because all of the decisions, and ultimately the instructional programs, emanate from that committee's work.
What do you say to the teacher who has a student taking, say, the 4th-grade ELA or math test who can't pass it but doesn't qualify for the alternate assessment?
There's no perfect answer to that question at this time. I think we're in transition. But while that's evolving we're trying to have the safety net in place for students with disabilities. The idea behind the safety net was that while we were studying the very question you're asking - what will the effects be? - the children would still basically have in place what had been in place for them, and have a chance.
What do teachers do if they believe a child is inappropriately placed?
When you feel you have to refer a child, the law is clear: A teacher can refer a child. You cannot deny referrals, however. There is a provision in the statute that should allow the principal to call together the individuals who made the referral and the parents, and try to talk about options. But in the end, the teacher has the right to refer.
What role should teachers have in the inclusion process?
Inclusion doesn't work without good planning. First of all, it takes an understanding of the principles behind it. It takes involvement of all teachers, because obviously the teachers are the ones who are going to be carrying out the program. It takes good leadership. It takes parent communication. And it takes careful assessment to make sure the students are meeting the standards.
How important is teacher involvement in this process?
I don't know how any school district can implement an effective educational strategy and not involve teachers in the planning. In districts that, have effective inclusion programs, the teachers are generally excited about it. I've gone to buildings where they're really proud of what's happening, and some of them have acknowledged that because of how it was done and their involvement and the camaraderie that's developed among the faculty, they've changed their minds about it.
We often hear about districts implementing a "one-size-fits-all" model, calling it "collaborative teaming" or a specially designed curriculum and eliminating parts of the continuum of special ed services. Some administrators are saying, "We're not going to do special classes anymore."
It's one of the classic dilemmas of IDEA. Because on one hand if you read through the entire congressional report and all the words of the law, over and over again it talks about the preference to have children in general education or regular education classes. And yet, it does require the availability of the continuum, so you have your advocacy for both ends of that spectrum always clashing. The continuum is a legal requirement so if there is a child who needs a certain type of setting that may not be the general education classroom, that has to be made available.
What are a general ed teacher's options in disciplining a child with disabilities?
The whole issue of discipline of students with disabilities is one of the most misunderstood issues, largely because the federal laws and regulations that have been constructed around it are so complicated and mind-boggling. Children with disabilities can be disciplined. There is nothing that says they can't be. However, they can't be denied an educational program if their disability might have caused the behavior. Every child in school has a right to an educational program that is not being disrupted and is safe, so if a teacher has a child who is being disruptive they need to address it. But I don't think removal in all cases is a good way to address it.
Are there alternatives?
One of the things federal law added to the special education "repertoire" was something called a "functional behavior assessment." There is a requirement under the discipline procedures to conduct one of these if the student's behavior impedes their learning or that of others. The whole idea is to look at the behavior and try to figure out why is it happening vs. trying to link it to a diagnosis. You're looking at what's the functional reason, the environmental reason, what's the trigger here? Then you try to develop a plan to address that rather than trying to fix the behavior itself. We have training available in that for any district that wants it.
Many teachers still tell us they're not getting information about the student's Individualized Education Program.
Districts have to provide timely access to the IEP for any teacher who is serving a child with a disability. We've tried to clarify that issue now on a number of occasions. As part of our quality assurance effort, we look at schools to see if the policies are in place and if there's evidence it's being carried out. But it's clearly a requirement.
What can teachers and local unions do in districts that continue to violate state and federal regulations?
The first thing is try to deal with it locally. We always urge people, if it's a union issue, have the union be involved with the administrators. Go to the folks who are in charge of the program and try to work things out. If that doesn't work, union representatives can call our regional special education offices. We recently re-established the Syracuse office so we have a new office in central New York. We've added a substantial number of regional associates with the idea that we need to have more oversight as well as more technical assistance available where the action really is. If it's a violation of law or it's a complaint about a violation of law, it's their responsibility to look at it.
And if it's more a lack of knowledge than unwillingness to resolve the issue?
In that situation, our Special Education Training and Resource Center is available to provide technical assistance to districts on things like CSE training, functional behavioral assessments, discipline. There's a lot of information on our Web site - www.vesid.nysed.gov.
How does the teacher shortage affect the special-education classroom?
We share NYSUT's concern on how we're going to obtain and retain the numbers of qualified people we need to serve these kids in the future. All the analyses of the future numbers look very bleak and, unlike any other part of education, there are staffing ratios and sizes connected to this program that don't exist in general education. So it's going to become a very difficult issue if we don't address it soon.
Why do you think special ed teachers leave the field?
Part of the reason, I think, is the paperwork and the IDEA environment - people just feeling intimidated by the whole process and having less time to teach.
- John Strachan
Web exclusive: more of your questions answered.
What will be the role of the new alternate assessment?
The alternate assessment process started in the fall where you have the most severely disabled children. I think it will be a big improvement for trying to judge the quality of programs for the severely disabled.
Most of SED's decisions are data-driven. What are you learning about students with disabilities who are taking state tests?
We're issuing RFPs for three studies. One looks at the issue of students taking multiple Regents over time and how they perform. We know, for instance, there's been dramatic improvement in the numbers of kids who are passing ELA and also passing math and all the other tests. We don't have information tracking the same kid through all tests, so we want to research that.
The second study involves component re-testing. We're looking at different ways of doing that with children with disabilities to see what options we might want to use.
The third study will identify characteristics of students with disabilities who are not passing the Regents and who are not eligible for the alternate assessment. When it comes time to reconsider the safety net we'll be able to provide the Regents with solid research.
How does special ed treat minority children?
The data is very clear. Not only are minorities placed in special ed at a higher rate, they're separated at a much higher rate than white children are. Even in New York state, a white child placed in special ed is more likely than not to be in the general ed classroom receiving support services, and a minority child is much more likely to be in a special class. And that's true around the country.
A lot of it comes down to what supports are available to kids as well as to teachers. How do general ed teachers get those supports?
Until we have adequate support services in general education we'll always be fighting over the issue of too many children being referred to special ed. So we push very hard to get more funding. It's still a major part of the Regents legislative proposal and the funding for support services has been quadrupled in the last four years. So the Legislature has responded. And if you look at IDEA and read the Congressional report about it, it talks about this whole connection between a lack of general ed supports and increased referral to special ed. In some school districts you see the special ed and general ed faculty very much together. They see themselves as part of the whole school, if you will. It's important for general education to have access to the special education skills, and over time as they team up more often, the general educator will pick up those skills. At the same time the special educator benefits from the content knowledge of the general educator. And the kids in those districts generally do far better because they're getting access to both sets of skills. Think about the money that's spent on the administration of special education - the evaluations, the paperwork, the meetings, the time. If you were to take some of that money and invest it in support services, you wouldn't need to spend more money.
What changes in the IDEA are needed to address the issues you've mentioned?
In terms of federal education law - and there's lots of different pieces of federal education law - there has to be a greater investment and support of general education as a program that supports all kids. In other words, if we're going to invest more money in education I think it should at least in part be targeted to the support systems, so that teachers and kids have the help at the time they need it. What we've done instead is constructed support systems that are there after it's too late to get the help you needed. Special education was designed, at least at one point, for the deaf child and the blind child and the severely emotionally disturbed child. Over time they became the minority number, and the larger groups were these kids who were struggling in school, who weren't getting the kind of help they needed and ended up being referred to special ed as some kind of an answer. Yet it didn't necessarily solve their problems and they stayed in special ed until leaving school.
What is the role of prevention teams in fixing inappropriate placements?
Prevention teams, which are referred to in IDEA now, are a very positive step. But they can't be used to deny, if you will, a referral. They are a logical way to look at kids who are having problems. They may even become the source of the referral or help find other options that make it unnecessary.We've done a lot of training on prevention services. In some of the BOCES they've instituted it across the region and had good results. I've gotten letters from teachers who are very happy with it. They feel it's a part of the support system, not a denial of their ability to refer.
Is enough attention being focused on what happens to students with disabilities when they grow up?
I would love to see more emphasis on this, because education systems sometimes focus solely on the fact that they're children. The fact is, almost every one of them ends up being an adult with a disability and when you talk to them then, they have a whole different viewpoint on life than we as adults did for them when they were kids. The unemployment rate is still extremely high, but the expectations are changing dramatically based on data that we have about what kids in special ed are planning to do. More than 40 percent plan to go on to post-secondary education. That's a dramatic increase from years ago, and I think it's positive.
What needs to be done to accommodate these students?
Make sure that what we do in school is preparing them to participate in life - working and generally going on to further their education. We now have absolute proof that lots of these kids could have been challenged more in school. We've got to understand that they're going to go on and want to be in careers, in college, to go to post-secondary education. They want to get a good job. And they're going to want to be citizens - full citizens. That's one of the reasons we have to accept the challenge of raising standards for them. If we raise standards for everybody but those kids, they're going to be absolutely unable to compete when they get out of school.
>Nevertheless, are we simply asking too much of some kids?
I think the data is unequivocal - there are thousands of kids who, because they were receiving special education, were in effect shut out from the general ed curriculum. Now, because you can't shut them out anymore, suddenly a whole group of those kids are doing much better than adults thought they would. There's been a forced opportunity that's really been a great benefit for them and hopefully we'll never go back to a point where those kids are denied opportunities they should have had.
What should school districts be doing to help special-needs kids?
Districts should be aligning their curriculum with the standards at all levels. That's a basic. In North Colonie, they spend a lot of time working on that, and the kids in special education programs are doing exceedingly well on state exams. I think sharing the data with teachers and using the data that is available - understanding results, analyzing, using them to make decisions - that's a new part of education. In fact we're seeing training in districts around the state about using data to change or realign the faculty roles or to change the instructual methodologies to pinpoint children who need intervention. That should be a fundamental, but not everyone is doing it.
There's a great deal of confusion over what's allowed in test accommodations and how to decide which accommodations to use.
The original SED manual on test accommodations was written at a time when accommodations were not used as frequently. Over time, different interpretations arose in different places about the very same words that were in that guideline. We've put out a revised accommodations guideline, but there is no consensus on accommodations. During the public meetings on test accommodations held last year, as many people wanted us to do nothing as those who wanted us to revamp them. What we've done is carefully research what the law says and try to stay true to the principle that's in the law. That is, accommodations are to level the playing field - not to modify the test, not to change the construct of the test, but to make sure that the kids with disabilities are accommodated as they take the test. So that's what we're focusing on, We will also be doing training on the revised guidelines.
How does New York compare to other states in separate placements?
It's nothing I'm proud of, but we still tend to use the special class model quite a bit more than other states. If you look behind that particular piece of data you'll see that it's primarily the urban centers that still use the model. And of course since we are a large urban state, that skews our data. We're like the tale of two states. We generally have a very integrated state outside the urban settings. But even in the most integrated programs in the country there are still special classes because there are still kids who need a very unique environment. And there are still special schools. And New York state happens to have more of them than most other places.
What have you learned from monitoring data on accommodations?
The most commonly used combination is extended time. It's the largest, by threefold. The next most commonly used - but not commonly used - is having a test read. We need to make sure that the reading accommodations are available when needed, but not being misused.
Is the use of accommodations on the increase?
We see greater use of them than ever before, but I think in part that's because more kids are participating in assessments. Secondly, more people are aware that accommodations are available. And I don't think that's bad.
Is SED considering use of more technology in administering state assessments - allowing kids to take them through computers, incorporating large print or providing for the mechanical reading of the assessment, for example?
Honestly, I have not heard people talking about that. But it's a very interesting question and in fact it's going to stir me to take a look at that because clearly we are not thinking today of the uses of technology 10 years from now.
In your role as immediate past president of the National Association of State Directors of Special Education we promised you an opportunity to talk about some national issues.
We still have continued growth enrollments in special ed. Even though our state has flattened out, many states still are growing. We still have the challenges associated with what I call real access to general ed curriculum. And there are too many kids who, once they are identified as needing special ed, lose the access just by virtue of having been identified. They get put into a different program with a different set of expectations.
And there is something that we don't all talk enough about: the tremendous performance gap between students with disabilities - even those that are not intellectually limiting - and other students. And particularly perplexing to me is that those gaps are very, very wide in poor and urban districts and not so wide at all in wealthy districts. Someone's got to put that out and say why?
Larry Gloeckler suggests these curriculum-related Web sites:
The percentage of preschool students with disabilities who are being served in integrated settings has more than doubled since 1995.
Although the percentage of students with disabilities who are educated in separate settings continues to decline in New York, the figure is still about twice the national average of 4.1 percent.
| 
