Saturday, February 6, 2016

Super Bowl Sunday

As many of you get ready to enjoy the Super Bowl, please enjoy the following fun facts from our friends at the U. S. Census Bureau - including some nuggets about changes over the last 50 years.

Super Bowl 50: Feb. 7, 2016

Super Bowl 50 will be played Feb. 7 at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, Calif. The first Super Bowl was played on Jan. 15, 1967, at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, with the Green Bay Packers beating the Kansas City Chiefs by the score of 35-10. This will be the second time the NFL’s championship game will be held in the San Francisco Bay Area. In the last one, the San Francisco 49ers beat the Miami Dolphins 38-16 at Stanford Stadium in 1985.
To commemorate this year’s golden anniversary Super Bowl, the Census Bureau has compiled a collection of facts looking at how life has changed from 1967 to 2016 and examining the demographics of the host metropolitan area, as well as the metro areas represented by the two participants — the Denver Broncos and the Carolina Panthers.
> for more statistics about the cities involved. Unless otherwise noted, all comparisons are statistically significant at the 0.10 level.

How Things Have Changed
U.S. Population
1967: 197.5 million
2016: 322.8 million
Sources: Estimates of the Population of the United States by Age, Sex and Race: April 1, 1960, to July 1, 1973
>

Monthly Population Estimates for the United States: April 1, 2010, to December 1, 2016 <http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2015/files/NA-EST2015-01.csv
>

Population of Santa, Clara, Calif., site of Super Bowl 50
April 1, 1970: 86,118
July 1, 2014: 122,192
>

U.S. Census Bureau, Vintage 2014 Population Estimates <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/PEP/2014/PEPANNRSIP.US12A
>

World Population
1967: 3.5 billion
2016: 7.3 billion
>

Median Sales Price of a New Single-Family Home
1967: $22,700
2016: $282,800 (as of 2014)
Note: Sales prices shown are not adjusted for inflation or other factors.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States: 1963-2015 <https://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/pdf/uspricemon.pdf
>

Cost of a Gallon of Regular Gas
1967: 33 cents ($2.13 in 2015 dollars) 
2016: $1.86 (as of Jan. 25, 2016)
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, U.S. Gasoline and Diesel Retail Prices <http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_dcus_nus_w.htm
>

Price of Milk
1967: $1.03 gallon ($7.32 in 2015 dollars)
2016: $3.31 gallon (as of 2015)
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index <http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ap
>

Cost of a First-Class Stamp
1967: 5 cents (36 cents in 2015 dollars)
2016: 49 cents
>

Median Age at First Marriage
1967: 23.1 men; 20.6 women
2016: 29.2 men; 27.1 women (as of 2015)
>

U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 American Community Survey <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/14_1YR/B12007
>

Number of Foreign-Born People
1967: 9.6 million (as of 1970: They comprised 4.7 percent of the total population, and Italy was the leading country of origin.)
2016: 42.4 million (as of 2014: They comprised 13.3 percent of the total population, and Mexico was the leading country of origin.)
Sources: Historical Census Statistics on the Foreign-Born Population of the United States: 1850 to 2000 <http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0081/twps0081.pdf
>

U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 American Community Survey <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/14_1YR/B05006
>

Average Household Size
1967: 3.28 people
2016: 2.54 people (as of 2015)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (Households by Size: 1960 to Present)<http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/households.html
>

Number of People Age 65 and Older
1967: 19.1 million
2016: 46.2 million (as of 2014)
Sources: Estimates of the Population of the United States by Age, Sex and Race: April 1, 1960, to July 1, 1973 <https://www.census.gov/prod/1/pop/p25-519.pdf
>

U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 Population Estimates <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/PEP/2014/PEPAGESEX
>

Median Age of the Population
1967: 28.1
2016: 37.7 (as of 2014)
Sources: Estimates of the Population of the United States by Age, Sex and Race: April 1, 1960, to July 1, 1973 <https://www.census.gov/prod/1/pop/p25-519.pdf
 >

U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 Population Estimates <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/PEP/2014/PEPAGESEX
>

Life Expectancy at Birth 
1967: 70.5 years
2016: 78.8 years (as of 2013)
Sources: Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970<http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/CT1970p1-03.pdf
>

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/life-expectancy.htm
>

Percentage of Women in the Labor Force, Age 16 and Older
1967: 41.1%
2016: 56.7% (as of 2015)
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey<http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300002?from_year=1967&periods_option=specific_periods&periods=Annual+Data
>

Percentage of the Population, Age 25 and Older, who had at Least a High School Diploma
1967: 51.1%
2016: 88.3% (as of 2014)
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 1967 Current Population Survey <http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/1967/p20-169.pdf
>

U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 Current Population Survey <http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2014/tables.html
>

Median Annual Household Income
1967: $7,143 ($44,282 in 2014 dollars)
2016: $53,657 (as of 2014)
Sources: 1968 and 2015 Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplements. Table H5. <http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/2014/h05.xls
>

Most Popular Baby Names for Boys and Girls
1967: Michael and Lisa
2016: Noah and Emma (as of 2014)
Source: Social Security Administration, Most Popular Baby Names <https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/index.html
>

Active-Duty Military Personnel
1967: 3.4 million
2016: 1.3 million (as of Nov. 30, 2015)
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 1969 Statistical Abstract <http://www2.census.gov/library/publications/1969/compendia/statab/90ed/1969-05.pdf
>

>

Denver Broncos
21st        
Where Denver ranked on the list of the nation’s most populous metropolitan areas. The estimated population of the Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, Colo., metro area on July 1, 2014, was 2,754,258. The Denver area gained 54,508 people from July 1, 2013, to July 1, 2014. At the time of the Broncos’ first season in 1960, the 1960 Census population for the city of Denver was 493,887.
Sources: Vintage 2014 Population Estimates, 1960 Census <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/PEP/2014/PEPANNCHG.US24PR
>

>

40.8%
Percentage of Denver metro area residents 25 and older who had a bachelor’s degree or higher in 2014; 89.7 percent had at least graduated from high school. The respective national figures were 30.1 percent and 86.9 percent.  
>

20.6%
Percentage of Denver metro area residents 5 and older who spoke a language other than English at home. The national average was 21.1 percent. These figures are not statistically different.
>

$66,870
Median household income for the Denver metro area. The national median was $53,657.
>

$276,800
Median home value of owner-occupied homes in the Denver metro area. The national median was $181,200.
>

27.4 minutes
Average amount of time it took Denver metro area residents to get to work; 76.3 percent of the metro area’s workers drove to work alone, 8.8 percent carpooled and 4.5 percent took public transportation. Nationally, it took an average of 26.0 minutes to get to work.
>

Carolina Panthers
22nd                                    
Where Charlotte ranked on the list of the nation’s most populous metropolitan areas. The estimated population of the Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, N.C.-S.C., metro area on July 1, 2014, was 2,380,314. The Charlotte area gained 42,975 people from July 1, 2013, to July 1, 2014. At the time of the Panthers’ first season in 1995, the July 1, 1995, estimated population for the city of Charlotte was 473,355.
Sources: Vintage 2014  Population Estimates, Population Estimates for the Years 1994-1999
>

>

32.9%    
Percentage of Charlotte metro area residents 25 and older who had a bachelor’s degree or higher in 2014; 88.1 percent had at least graduated from high school. The respective national figures were 30.1 percent and 86.9 percent. 
>

13.3%
Percentage of Charlotte metro area residents 5 and older who spoke a language other than English at home. The national average was 21.1 percent.
>

$53,549                 
Median household income for the Charlotte metro area. The national median was $53,657. These figures are not statistically different.
>

$169,400
Median home value of owner-occupied homes in the Charlotte metro area. The national median was $181,200.
>

26.1 minutes
Average amount of time it took Charlotte metro area residents to get to work; 81.0 percent of the metro area’s workers drove to work alone, 9.4 percent carpooled and 1.9 percent took public transportation. Nationally, it took an average of 26.0 minutes to get to work, which is not statistically difference from the Charlotte metro area’s time.
>

Friday, February 5, 2016

Where Do Presidential Candidates Stand on Disability Issues?

OK so I'm not going to ask any questions until the major parties select a candidate. For the record, this blog never supports any candidate in any election. We do try to obtain information for our readers, however. Once the players are determined, we'll send out a questionnaire. 

In the meantime, over at the RespectAbility Blog, they have already sent questionnaires to the presidential candidates, The candidates earned points by having any plan as to an issue. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders each earned 100 points, and Jeb Bush got a 94. On the other end of the spectrum, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz each got a zero by not returning the questionnaire. The folks at RestectAbility entered this word of caution in interpreting the scores:
While there are three candidates with extremely high scores, they have dramatically different ideas about how to deal with the issues. It’s extremely important to read to their full answers so that you can understand their important differences. Issues in the detailed scorecard include employment, stigma, education, safety, transportation, housing, healthcare, foreign affairs and other issues.

The scores are available here. The responses to the questionnaires may be read here.

Your thoughts?

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Feds Issue Guidance To States on Transition to New ESEA #ESEA

The U.S. Department of Education has issued guidance to states concerning the transition to the new provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, fka No Child Left Behind, and now also known as the Every Student Succeeds Act.  The Dear Colleague letter to Chief State School Officers is available to read here. 

In a previous post, we discussed the major changes in the new law. You may read that post here.

The Department of Education earlier released preliminary guidance on the new ESEA. We discussed the earlier guidance here.

Monday, February 1, 2016

Weekly Question!

As we run a series of posts on my interview with Michael Yudin, asst Secretary of Ed for Special Ed, etc, it should be obvious that I didn't get to ask all the questions that I wanted to ask in the limited time available to him. What would you like to ask Michael Yudin?

Thursday, January 28, 2016

Exclusive Interview of Michael Yudin, Assistant Secretary of Education - Part V #Yudin, #interview

This is the fifth and final post of our exclusive interview with Michael Yudin, the Assistant Secretary of Education for special education and rehabilitative services. His biography is available here.

We are grateful to the Secretary and his staff for this interview. This was an honor. Thanks to our readers for all the great comments and attaboys.


The format of the interview will be questions by me signified by (JG), and answers by the Assistant Secretary, signified by (MY).  Here is the fifth segment:


JG:  This interview will be read by lawyers, advocates, parents, teachers, administrators and many other special education stakeholders. Is there anything that you would ask of us- maybe a call to action?
MY:  Yes. A couple things.  One is back to the discipline issue and it involves certain law firms. If you google the term “ten free days,” you’ll find links to law firms and state education agencies and school districts that say you can remove a kid with disabilities for ten free days  without any services or supports. There is nothing free about removing a kid with a disability, or any kid, from the classroom. So yes I would urge those folks to seriously rethink discipline and understand what the consequences of removal are. So that would be number one.
And the second goes back to what I said earlier about making sure that kids with disabilities have the opportunity to be successful. We know that from forty years of research that kids with disabilities do better when they are held to high standards and have access to the general curriculum with the right kinds of supports and services and intensive interventions, research shows that kids, even struggling learners with disabilities can absolutely succeed at grade level work if they are provided with the right kinds of  supports and services and intensive interventions and instruction through the IEP. And the IEP is the vehicle, the opportunity for kids with disabilities to ultimately access and learn grade level content. Research shows that they can do it. We need to make sure that kids with disabilities can do it. Our guidance that we just put out clarified that IEPs must be aligned with the state’s content standards for the grade in which the child is enrolled and in order to make FAPE available, the child’s IEP must be designed to enable the child to advance appropriately in making progress toward his annual goals and to make progress in the general education curriculum based on the state’s content standards for the grade in which the child is enrolled. {ED NOTE: see our previous blog post on the guidance here: http://specialeducationlawblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/breaking-feds-issue-new-guidance-ieps.html} That would be takeaway number two.

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Second Circuit Affirms TK Bullying Decision #bully #FAPE

On January 20, 2016, the influential Second Circuit court of appeals affirmed the seminal TK bullying decision by the District Court for the eastern District of New York. The TK decision is the leading case on bullying and IDEA. You can read our previous posts on the TK decision here,  and here.

The Second Circuit affirmed the district court decision below. Significantly, however, the appellate court did not decide whether the failure of a school district to consider bullying in the development of an IDEA can constitute a violation of IDEA because the school district in this case conceded the issue. Given that concession, the Second Circuit found a procedural violation by the district not considering the bullying in the IEP development that was a significant impairment of the parent's right to participate and, therefore, a denial of F.APE. Because the parent's private school was appropriate and because the equities did not compel a different result, the court affirmed the award of reimbursement of private school tuition. 

One more important note. Although the Second Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court, it mentioned in footnote 3 that it expressed no opinion concerning the four part test articulated by the district court as to whether bullying violates IDEA. {The test was as follows: (1)  was the student a victim of bullying; (2) did the school have notice of  substantial bullying of the student; (3) was the school “deliberately indifferent” to the bullying, or did it fail to take reasonable steps to prevent  the bullying; and (4) did the bullying “substantially restrict” the student’s  “educational opportunities}

You can read the entire Second Circuit decision here.

Monday, January 25, 2016

Weekly Question!

As we run a series of posts on my interview with Michael Yudin, asst Secretary of Ed for Special Ed, etc, it should be obvious that I didn't get to ask all the questions that I wanted to ask in the limited time available to him. What would you like to ask Michael Yudin?