Thursday, December 31, 2015

Happy New Year


As the year turns, it's time for reflection and resolutions.So think back upon last year and get ready for the new one,  and most importantly chew the black-eyed peas carefully.

If anybody has a good special education resolution, we'd love to hear it. Please share.

To all of our loyal and fantastic readers, Happy New Year!


In the meantime, here are some fun facts about world and US population from our friends at the Census Bureau:

As our nation prepares to ring in the new year, the U.S. Census Bureau today projected the United States population will be 322,762,018 on Jan. 1, 2016. This represents an increase of 2,472,745, or 0.77 percent, from New Year’s Day 2015. Since Census Day (April 1) 2010, the population has grown by 14,016,480, or 4.54 percent.
In 2016, the United States is expected to experience one birth every eight seconds and one death every ten seconds. Meanwhile, net international migration is expected to add one person to the U.S. population every 29 seconds. The combination of births, deaths and net international migration increases the U.S. population by one person every 17 seconds.
The projected world population on Jan. 1 is 7,295,889,256, an increase of 77,918,825, or 1.08 percent, from New Year’s Day 2015. During January 2016, 4.3 births and 1.8 deaths are expected worldwide every second.
The Census Bureau’s U.S. and World Population Clock
 simulates real-time growth of the U.S. and world populations at <http://www.census.gov/popclock
>.

Monday, December 28, 2015

Weekly Question!

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible." Does restorative justice have a place in special education: re bullying, student discipline, remedies. etc? What do you think?

Thursday, December 24, 2015

Merry Christmas

To all of our readers, please have a Merry Christmas.  Please remember to think about others in this most important holiday. Below is some music and some fun facts. Enjoy the holiday.

Here is some nice Christmas music for you:




Here are some fun facts about the holiday season from our friends at the U. S. Census Bureau:

Rush to the Stores
$24.5 billion
Estimated retail sales by the nation’s department stores (including leased departments) in December 2014. This represents an estimated 41.2 percent jump from the previous month when retail sales were estimated at $17.3 billion. No other estimated month-to-month increase in department store sales last year was as large. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Monthly Retail Trade Survey
>

Note: Leased departments are separately owned businesses operated as departments or concessions of other service establishments or of retail businesses, such as a separately owned shoeshine parlor in a barber shop, or a beauty shop in a department store. Also, retail sales and inventory estimates have not been adjusted to account for seasonal or pricing variations.
14.2% 
The estimated percentage of total 2014 sales for department stores (including leased departments) in December. For jewelry stores, the estimated percentage was 18.2 percent. Sources: U.S. CensusBureau, Monthly Retail Trade Survey <http://www.census.gov/econ/currentdata/dbsearch?program=MRTS&startYear=1992&endYear=2014&categories=4521I&dataType=SM&geoLevel=US&notAdjusted=1&submit=GET+DATA
> and <http://www.census.gov/econ/currentdata/dbsearch?program=MRTS&startYear=1992&endYear=2014&categories=44831&dataType=SM&geoLevel=US&notAdjusted=1&submit=GET+DATA
>

21.7%
The estimated growth in inventories by our nation’s department stores (excluding leased departments) from Aug. 31 to Nov. 30, 2014. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Monthly Retail Trade Survey<http://www.census.gov/econ/currentdata/dbsearch?program=MRTS&startYear=1992&endYear=2014&categories=4521E&dataType=IM&geoLevel=US&notAdjusted=1&submit=GET+DATA
>

$48.3 billion
Estimated value of retail sales by electronic shopping and mail-order houses in December 2014 — the highest estimated total for any month last year. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Monthly Retail Trade Survey <http://www.census.gov/econ/currentdata/dbsearch?program=MRTS&startYear=1992&endYear=2014&categories=4541&dataType=SM&geoLevel=US&notAdjusted=1&submit=GET+DATA
>

31,112
The number of electronic shopping and mail-order houses in business in 2013. These businesses, which employed 383,066 workers in the pay period including March 12, are a popular source of holiday gifts. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 County Business Patterns <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~45411
>

Christmas Trees and Decorations
$1.2 billion
The value of U.S. imports of Christmas tree ornaments from China between January and September 2015. China was the leading country of origin for such items. Similarly, China was the leading foreign source of artificial Christmas trees shipped to the United States ($163.3 million worth) during the same period. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Statistics <http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade
>

567 
Estimated number of U.S. producers who grew poinsettias in 2014. California, North Carolina and Florida ranked in the top three for sales of the popular holiday plant. Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service (pg. 42) <http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/FlorCrop/FlorCrop-06-04-2015.pdf
>

Where Toys are Made

545
The number of locations that primarily produced dolls, toys and games in 2013; they employed 6,538 workers in the pay period including March 12. California led the nation with 86 establishments. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 County Business Patterns <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1/0100000US|0100000US.04000/naics~33993
>

Holiday Names
Place names associated with the holiday season consist of a dozen places named Holly, including Mount Holly, N.C. (population 14,016) and Holly Springs, Miss. (7,574). There is Snowflake, Ariz. (5,644), Santa Claus, Ind. (2,479), North Pole, Alaska (2,178), Noel, Mo. (1,831) and — if you know about reindeer — Dasher, Ga. (959) and Rudolph, Wis. (433). There is also Unity, N.H. (1,615) and Peace, N.D. (28). Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates <http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2014/SUB-EST2014.html
>


$1.7 billion
The estimated product shipments value of candles in 2013 by U.S. manufacturers. Many of these candles are lit during Diwali (Nov. 11), Hanukkah (Dec. 6-14) and Kwanzaa (Dec. 26-Jan. 1) celebrations. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 Economic Census, Industry Series <http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ASM/2013/31VS101//prodsvc~3399995
>

11.5%
The estimated percentage by which the U.S. Postal Service surpassed its own projections for package deliveries in December 2014. This marks an increase of 18 percent from package deliveries in December 2013. Sources: U.S. Postal Service <http://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2014/pr14_057.htm
> and <http://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2015/pr15_002.htm
>

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Feds Provide Guidance on Recent Changes to ESEA #ESEA

The U. S. Department of Education issued a Dear Colleague Letter on Friday providing guidance on the recently reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  The letter covers  expectations regarding: Title I assessment peer review; annual measurable objectives (AMOs) and annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs) for school years 2014–2015 and 2015–2016; conditions and other related requirements under ESEA flexibility; priority and focus school lists; and educator evaluation and support systems under ESEA flexibility. 

In addition, the letter notes that  a Request for Information (RFI) that seeks advice and recommendations regarding regulations under Title I of the ESEA as reauthorized by the ESSA is available today for public inspection at https://www.federalregister.gov/public-inspection. A link to that document will be available at www.ed.gov/essa when it is published in the Federal Register. So if you have thoughts about new Title I regulations, you may provide input there.

You can read the Dear Colleague Letter here.

Monday, December 21, 2015

Weekly Question!

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible." Does restorative justice have a place in special education: re bullying, student discipline, remedies. etc? What do you think?

Thursday, December 17, 2015

President Signs ESEA Reauthorization Into Law #ESEA

 President Obama signed the Every Child Succeeds Act (S. 1177) into law last week. This law is the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, until recently also known as No Child Left Behind.  You can read the text of the law here. You may read the entire report of the House-Senate Conference Committee here. The Department of Education website has a wealth of information about the new law here. The White House fact sheet about the new law is available here. Even more resources about the law are available on the Policy Insider blog of our friends at the CEC.

There are a few big changes that concern the education of students with disabilities.  One is that the highly qualified teacher requirement is removed. Another is that the adequate yearly progress requirements are removed and replaced by a statewide accountability system.  The following chart compiled by the Council for Exceptional Children lists the other major changes in the law:

CEC’s Summary of Selected Provisions in Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) 
In December 2015, the U.S. Congress passed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act / No Child left Behind (ESEA/NCLB). This summary of selected provisions in ESSA is intended to provide CEC members with information on issues relevant to children and youth with disabilities and gifts and talents. The summary includes new provisions as well as those provisions eliminated. This summary is not intended to be exhaustive of all the provisions nor reflective of CEC’s position on the provision. 
General
 Transfers authority for accountability, educator evaluations and school improvement from the federal government to the states and local districts. 
Assessments and Accountability 
 Maintains annual, statewide assessments in reading and math in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school, as well as science tests given three times between grades 3 and 12. 
 Repeals adequate yearly progress and replaces it with a statewide accountability system. 
 Includes the use of multiple measures in school performance. 
 Maintains annual reporting of data disaggregate by subgroups of children including students with disabilities. 
 Maintains with some modifications provisions for a cap of 1% of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who can take the alternate assessment aligned to the alternate academic achievements standards. 
 Helps states to improve low performing schools (bottom of 5% of schools). Actions will be determined locally not federally. 
 Authorizes the use of federal funds for states and local school districts to conduct audits of state and local assessment systems to eliminate assessments that do not contribute to student learning. Standards 
 Ensures States are able to choose their challenging academic standards in reading and math aligned to higher education in the state without interference from the federal government. The federal government may not mandate or incentivize states to adapt or maintain any particular set of standards, including Common Core.
Funding 
 Provides $15+ billion a year to states in formula funding, as well as additional funds through competitive grants. 
 Maintains maintenance of effort and supplement not supplant, with additional flexibility for States and local school districts. 
 Choice for Parents
 Improves the Charter Schools Program by investing in new charter school models, as well as allowing for the replication and expansion of high quality charter school models. 
Early Childhood 
 Authorizes the Preschool Development Grants program. This competitive grant program will use existing funding to support states that propose to improve coordination, quality and access for early childhood education and will be administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services with the Department of Education. 
Teacher Effectiveness 
 Eliminates highly qualified. 
 Eliminates federally mandated teacher evaluation system. 
 Includes an option to transfer unlimited amounts of professional development funds out of Title II.  Encourages states and local school districts to develop teacher and principal residency and induction programs, support teachers and principals through professional learning and growth systems and leadership opportunities. 
 Provides for the allowable use of funds for establishing or expanding teacher preparation academies. 
Portability 
 Rejects “portability” provisions that would have allowed states to shift federal funds away from schools that need them most. 
Vouchers 
 Rejects vouchers. 
Pay for Success 
 Adds a pay for success initiative that is defined as a performance – based grant, contract, or cooperative agreement awarded by a public entity in which a commitment is made to pay for improved outcomes that result in social benefit and direct cost savings or cost avoidance to the public sector. 
Mental Health 
 Requires consultation with school psychologists and other specialized instructional personnel in the development of state and local plans. 
  Recognizes school – based mental health services as an evidence – based whole – school improvement and targeted intervention strategy. 
 Authorizes significant investments for states and districts to implement: comprehensive school mental health services, efforts to improve school climate and school safety, strategies to reduce bullying and harassment, and activities to improve collaboration between school, family and the community. 
Gifted and Talented 
 Authorizes the Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act supporting high ability learners and learning. 
 Includes strong provisions for the disaggregation of student achievement data by subgroup at each achievement level on state and local report cards. 
 Provides options to include the identification of and service to students with gifts and talents in local education agency plans. 
 Provides options to include professional development plans for gifted and talented educators in Title II. 
Children with Disabilities 
 Ensures access to the general education curriculum. 
 Ensures access to accommodations on assessments.  Ensures concepts of Universal Design for Learning, 
 Includes provisions that require local education agencies to provide evidence – based interventions in schools with consistently underperforming subgroups. 
 Requires states in Title I plans to address how they will improve conditions for learning including reducing incidents of bullying and harassment in schools, overuse of discipline practices and reduce the use of aversive behavioral interventions (such as restraints and seclusion). 

So what do you think of the new ESEA?

Monday, December 14, 2015

Weekly Question!

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible." Does restorative justice have a place in special education: re bullying, student discipline, remedies. etc? What do you think?

Saturday, December 12, 2015

Comparative Special Education Law: Scotland - Part II

At the CADRE Symposium in October, I met a special education mediator from Scotland, Morag Steven. She presented an interesting concurrent session. I always find comparative special education law to be fascinating. This is a powerpoint that she used during her presentation. This is her website.

She also agreed to be interviewed for this blog. Her answers to the first questions can be found in this earlier post.  Her answers to the remaining questions follow:



3. What is mediation like for special education disputes in Scotland?
My company Common Ground Mediation and another collaborative competitor Resolve:ASL have contracts to deliver additional support needs (ASN) mediation across about 70% of Scotland, and broadly speaking we use the same model. Because of the broad scope of the terms of ASL and ASN, we mediate all sorts of disputes, not just the ones where there are statutory duties and legal issues. For example, we mediate disputes about school placement, types of support and adaptations available in schools, parental complaints etc, but we also mediate when the issues are less tangible, such as loss of trust and respect, poor communication, differing views about the child's/student's abilities, etc.  In fact, what I call 'interpersonal issues' is one of the main factors in ASN mediation, despite effective home school partnership being championed by the Scottish Government.

4. Having attended the CADRE symposium, what similarities and differences do you see for special ed mediation in the US as compared to Scotland? What can we learn from each other?
Attending the CADRE symposium for the first time was just as fantastic an experience as I had hoped for. It was great to meet so many special education mediators from across US and gain affirmation that we are all working with the same values and principles. There are many similarities despite our different legal systems in education, but I was also interested in variations across US states, where some (including California, I think) seem to have 2 types of special education mediation, one less formal at an early stage (perhaps more similar to what we offer in Scotland) and the other more formal when a due process hearing has been requested. I hope I have picked up this information correctly!
In Scotland mediation services are legally obliged to ensure that the child/student's views are included in whatever way seems appropriate, and I was surprised that there was not so much discussion about this issue at the symposium - so that seems to be a difference between us. On the other hand, I attended the session about Student-Led IEPs and student engagement as a driver of change, and was very impressed by the work of School Talk in Washington DC.

5. What else would you say to our readers about special education mediation? 
It took some years for educators in Scotland to understand the potential benefits of mediation and other types of dispute resolution in education. However, everyone agrees that the best way to support children's learning is to encourage effective communication and partnership working between parents and educators. It's not surprising that there can be disagreements and differences of opinion - but that doesn't necessarily have to lead to destructive conflict. It can be very challenging to bring up a child with a disability and/or additional support need (I have personal experience of this) but schools and teachers have their own challenges and frustrations too. Scottish parents have been encouraged by successive governments to think of themselves as consumers of a service, and their expectations are high, at a time when public service budgets continue to be cut. I think there will continue to be a growing need for mediation!

You can learn more about special education mediation in Scotland in this article from the Times Educational Supplement Scotland.

Monday, December 7, 2015

Weekly Question!

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible." Does restorative justice have a place in special education: re bullying, student discipline, remedies. etc? What do you think?

Monday, November 30, 2015

NEW Weekly Question!

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible." Does restorative justice have a place in special education: re bullying, student discipline, remedies. etc? What do you think?

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Lessons from the CADRE Symposium Part IV #Restorative Remedies


One of the things that I do is train hearing officers, mediators and state complaint investigators for state education departments. I also have a large network of fellow hearing officers, mediators and state complaint investigators. We often compare notes.

A matter that hearing officers and investigators often find challenging is fashioning appropriate remedies or relief in cases where the parent or student prevails. The hearing officer and investigator have broad power to fashion appropriate equitable relief when IDEA has been violated. Forrest Grove Sch Dist v. TA 557 U.S. 230, 129 S.Ct. 2484, 52 IDELR 151 (U.S.  6/22/9). However,  reimbursement requires balancing three factors, and compensatory education can be difficult to calculate when the parties rarely offer evidence of educational harm

Crafting a remedy is particularly difficult in cases involving procedural violations where compensatory education may not be called for or where reimbursement is not appropriate. Also the relief rarely affects the ongoing relationship issues that are so important when considering the future education of a child.

In a recent post (which you can review here), I described a great panel session at the CADRE Symposium last month that discussed Restorative Justice and its application to special education. One of the panelists on that panel was a state investigator who had issued a state complaint decision requiring the school district, that had failed to comply with IDEA discipline requirements, to provide training to its staff - including training on alternatives to traditional discipline- including restorative justice. The remedy was appropriate given the violation, and it is a creative way to address the problem.  You can and should read the state complaint investigator's decision here.

I believe that in the near future, you will see more hearing officers and investigators fashioning relief where the parents win that requires restorative justice in various ways, whether in conjunction with compensatory education or reimbursement or not.  Unlike other remedies, restorative remedies or training in restorative justice has the potential to help heal the relationship issues so often present in these cases. I believe that this would be a good thing for children with disabilities.

Have any of you seen other examples of restorative relief in a hearing officer decision or complaint investigator report? If you do come across other  decisions with this type of relief, please send them to me.

What do you think about restorative remedies?


Monday, November 23, 2015

NEW Weekly Question!

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible." Does restorative justice have a place in special education: re bullying, student discipline, remedies. etc? What do you think?

Friday, November 20, 2015

Lessons From the CADRE Conference - Part III Restorative Justice #RJ

There were many excellent concurrent sessions at the amazing CADRE Symposium in Eugene, Oregon in October. In fact it was difficult to choose a session to attend because you would be missing other great sessions.

My favorite concurrent session, after my own, was a panel on the application of restorative justice to special education dispute resolution organized by my friend, John Inglish of the Oregon Department of Education. The panel did a great job. Although I will try to briefly summarize some key points here, but to get a better flavor for restorative justice and its application to special education dispute resolution, I strongly encourage to view the CADRE webinar video below on this topic.

According to Howard Zehr, "Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in the specific offense, and to collectively identify and address harms, needs,  and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible."

Restorative justice replaces questions such as "what rules or laws have been broken" with "who has been hurt;"  "who broke the rules," and "what do they deserve" with "who has been hurt," "what do they need," and "who has the obligation to address the needs and put right the harm." The work of restorative justice is generally is done in a circle- involving the "offender," the "victim" and others who have an interest. The process has worked well in Native American cultures, as well as in our own Juvenile Justice system.

The panel explained the process and included a student and parent who used a restorative justice circle successfully and have now become advocates for the system. The panelists suggested that the use of restorative justice might have application in cases of bullying and of discipline of students with disabilities- two topics we all deal with daily.

In my next post, we will examine the panel's suggestion of the possible application to special education dispute resolution. This suggestion really has me excited!

You can view the session materials here. A video used by the presenters is available here. You can view the CADRE  webinar video  that preceded this session but covers some of the topics here.  You can read a transcript of the webinar here. The power-point accompanying the webinar is available here.

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Comparative Special Education Law: Scotland - Part I

At the CADRE Symposium in October, I met a special education mediator from Scotland, Morag Steven. She presented an interesting concurrent session. I always find comparative special education law to be fascinating. This is a powerpoint that she used during her presentation. This is her website.

She also agreed to be interviewed for this blog. Her answers to  the first few questions follow. The remainder of the interview will be posted next week:


1. Please tell our readers a little about your background and how you got into mediation and special education mediation.
In 1999 my first job after an extended period of being a full-time mum (one of my sons was born with complex and profound disabilities) was as Mediation Project Officer with a new organisation set up with direct funding from the Scottish Government: Enquire (www.enquire.org.uk) Enquire is the national information and advice service for additional support for learning/special education across Scotland. At this time the Scottish Government was thinking about introducing a dispute resolution framework into special education, and I was involved setting up the first pilot. I decided to take some basic mediation training myself - and have been practising as a mediator ever since then in many sectors including neighbour and community disputes, employment and workplace disputes, and equality issues. I gained an MSc in Mediation and Conflict Resolution (University of Strathclyde) in 2012, and my current work includes mediating professional complaints for the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission and also teaching mediation to newly qualified law graduates as part of the Diploma in Professional Legal Practice (required in Scotland in order to work as a lawyer). Interesting progression for someone who's not a qualified lawyer myself! But my real passion is special education mediation - and that's the majority of my work.

2. What are the special education laws like in Scotland?
Scotland is (still!) part of the UK, but since 1999 education is one area that has been devolved to the Scottish Government which means our education laws are a bit different from those in England. One major change was the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 (amended 2009) which introduced the very broad concept of ASL to include every child/student who faces some sort of barrier to their learning. The Act also introduced a dispute resolution framework including independent mediation and third party review by the Additional Support Needs Tribunal Scotland. The Act was designed to strengthen parents' rights to request assessments, receive information and advice, be involved in planning support for their child/student, etc.
The (UK) Equality Act 2010 protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society, and makes it unlawful for schools to discriminate against students because of their disability or other factors.
Getting It Right For Every Child (GIRFEC) is a major current policy to meet the Scottish Government's aspirational aim of 'making Scotland the best place in the world for our children and young people to grow up'. Aspects of this policy became statutory in the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014.
As a non-lawyer, I feel that Scotland has robust legislation and policy; however getting these embedded into practice in schools has so far met with variable success. Policy writers often forget about the human factors!

Breaking: House-Senate Conference Committee Approves ESEA Framework #ESEA #NCLB

Today a House-Senate conference committee approved a framework for reautohrization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, One might say that No Child Left Behind has been left behind! (NOTE of personal {well not really privilege}: In working as a graduate assistant while obtaining my master's degree in public policy, I had to read hundreds of conference committee reports. Not great reading!). The very old law has a new name the "Every Child Succeeds Act." This replaces the house version "Student Success Act, " and the Senate version "Every Child Achieves Act." A rose by ant other name... {Insert your own joke about Congress here.}

Here are some quotes for the congressional education leaders: 

No Child Left Behind has been failing students, parents, teachers, and state and local education leaders for far too long, and today we took an important step in replacing this flawed law,” said Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (R-MN). “But there is still work to be done. We now have to turn this framework into a final bill for our House and Senate colleagues to review. I am confident that once they do, they will see it as an opportunity to replace a failed approach to education with a new approach that will reduce the federal role, restore local control, and empower parents. We will continue to work with all of our colleagues in the House as we move this important process forward.”
“The winners today are 50 million children and 3 million teachers in 100,000 public schools,” said Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-TN). “Our action would restore to states, communities, and teachers the responsibility for improving student achievement. This is a bipartisan step forward to fix the No Child Left Behind law that everyone wants fixed. The United States Senate and House of Representatives should complete our work in December so that the president can sign it into law before the end of the year.”
“With today's vote by the conference committee to reauthorize the ESEA, we have moved closer to advancing the principles of Brown v. Board of Education, which said that the opportunity for a public education 'is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms,'” said Education and the Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA). “This agreement ensures that when achievement gaps are found, meaningful action will be taken to intervene and support the needs of students. It ensures that funds will continue to be directed to communities and give teachers and schools the resources they need to support all students. I look forward to the vote by the House and Senate that will send President Obama a bill that is indeed worthy of his signature.”
“Taking this next step to finally fix the broken No Child Left Behind law is great news for students, parents, teachers, and communities in my home state of Washington and across the country,” said Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Ranking Member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. “I am proud that our agreement includes strong federal guardrails to ensure all students have access to a quality education, reduces reliance on high-stakes testing, makes strong investments to improve and expand access to preschool for our youngest learners, and so much more. I appreciate the hard work that so many Democrats and Republicans have put into this agreement, and I am optimistic that it can pass both chambers of Congress and get signed into law to help more students across the country get the chance to learn, grow, and thrive in the classroom and beyond.”

You can read a summary of the agreement here.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Breaking: Feds Issue New Guidance: IEPs Should Align With Grade-Level Standards #FAPE

The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services of the U. S. Department of Education issued a new Dear Colleague Letter yesterday stating that IEPs must be aligned to a state's content standards for the grade in which the student is enrolled.

The guidance document states, "Research has demonstrated that children with disabilities who struggle in reading and mathematics can successfully learn grade-level content and make significant academic progress when appropriate instruction, services, and supports are provided. Conversely, low expectations can lead to children with disabilities receiving less challenging instruction that reflects below grade-level content standards, and thereby not learning what they need to succeed at the grade in which they are enrolled..."

"Based on the interpretation of “general education curriculum” set forth in this letter, we expect annual IEP goals to be aligned with State academic content standards for the grade in which a child is enrolled. This alignment, however, must guide but not replace the individualized decision-making required in the IEP process. In fact, the IDEA’s focus on the individual needs of each child with a disability is an essential consideration when IEP Teams are writing annual goals that are aligned with State academic content standards for the grade in which a child is enrolled so that the child can advance appropriately toward attaining those goals during the annual period covered by the IEP. In developing an IEP, the IEP Team must consider how a child’s specific disability impacts his or her ability to advance appropriately toward attaining his or her annual goals that are aligned with applicable State content standards during the period covered by the IEP. For example, the child’s IEP Team may consider the special education instruction that has been provided to the child, the child’s previous rate of academic growth, and whether the child is on track to achieve grade-level proficiency within the year."

The guidance does note that a small number of children with the most significant cognitive disabilities will continue to take the alternate assessment, and it state further "In a case where a child’s present levels of academic performance are significantly below the grade in which the child is enrolled, in order to align the IEP with grade-level content standards, the IEP Team should estimate the growth toward the State academic content standards for the grade in which the child is enrolled that the child is expected to achieve in the year covered by the IEP. In a situation where a child is performing significantly below the level of the grade in which the child is enrolled, an IEP Team should determine annual goals that are ambitious but achievable. In other words, the annual goals need not necessarily result in the child’s reaching grade-level within the year covered by the IEP, but the goals should be sufficiently ambitious to help close the gap. The IEP must also include the specialized instruction to address the unique needs of the child that result from the child’s disability necessary to ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that the child can meet the State academic content standards that apply to all children in the State."

You can read the entire guidance document here.


Monday, November 16, 2015

New Weekly Question!

How would you rate the quality of writing by professionals in the field of special education dispute resolution? What would you suggest to improve the quality of hearing officer decisions, state complaint investigator reports, mediation agreements, etc?

Sunday, November 15, 2015

Lessons From the CADRE Symposium - Part II #appreciative inquiry

This is the second post pertaining to lessons learned at the CADRE Symposium in Eugene, Oregon in October. As always the outstanding conference was a huge success.

It is amazing just how much information was available at this conference. Although I can hardly do it justice here, I wanted to take the time to do a few posts relating some of the educational materials that resonated with me. 

The first keynote speakers, Pru Sullivan and Miriam Novotny, addressed the topic of appreciative inquiry. The are very entertaining and dynamic speakers. I also attended their separate concurrent session.

Appreciative inquiry was a new concept for me. It involves a positive, appreciating component- valuing and appreciating strengths, as well as recognizing that our questions are vitally important (with our questions we make the world.) They spoke about the art of the question and about "preframing" or a positive reframe. They provided guidance on how to craft questions. (This portion of their presentations was very useful for mediators as well as others.)

But what really struck a chord with me was their idea that appreciative inquiry could be applied to IEP team meetings. They have experimented successfully with this concept. One key point here: they suggested that we focus on a child's strengths. One problem is that we tend to obsess about a child's "needs" which we equivocate with weaknesses or deficits.  A strength based approach might yield a better outcome of children with disabilities.

Now I can hear you saying - but the law...the law... And to be clear I am not advocating a radical departure from the way things are done. You still need present levels and everything else the regs say has to be in an IEP.

The point is, however, that we should maybe spend some more of our IEP team time on the child's strengths. Maybe a bit more  than the one sentence on the form about strengths.  What do you think?

Happy Thanksgiving

On this holiday, we pause to give thanks. Gratitude is an important factor in our happiness.  So give thanks and have a happy day.

To help us celebrate, our friends at the U S Census Bureau have provided these impressive Thanksgiving data:

In the fall of 1621, the Pilgrims — early settlers of Plymouth Colony — held a three-day feast to celebrate a bountiful harvest. This event is regarded by many as the nation’s first Thanksgiving. The Wampanoag Indians in attendance played a key role. Historians have recorded ceremonies of thanks among other groups of European settlers in North America. These include the British colonists in Virginia as early as 1619.
The legacy of thanks and the feast have survived the centuries, as the event became a national holiday 152 years ago (Oct. 3, 1863) when President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed the last Thursday of November as a national day of thanksgiving. Later, President Franklin Roosevelt clarified that Thanksgiving should always be celebrated on the fourth Thursday of the month to encourage earlier holiday shopping, never on the occasional fifth Thursday.

Where to Feast



117 million
Number of occupied housing units across the nation in the second quarter of 2015 — all potential stops for Thanksgiving dinner.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Housing Vacancies and Homeownership, Table 8
<http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtabs.html>
4.5 million
Number of multigenerational households in the U.S. in 2014. It is possible these households, consisting of three or more generations, will have to purchase large quantities of food to accommodate all the family members sitting around the table for the holiday feast — even if there are no guests!
Source: 2014 American Community Survey, Table B11017
<http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_14_1YR_B11017&prodType=table>
4
Number of places in the United States named after the holiday’s traditional main course. Turkey Creek Village, La., was the most populous in 2014, with 443 residents, followed by Turkey Creek, Ariz. (412), Turkey City, Texas (396) and Turkey Town, N.C. (296). There are also 11 townships in the U.S. with “Turkey” in the name. (Please note that the Turkey Creek, Ariz., population total pertains to the 2009-2013 American Community Survey and is not statistically different from the population estimates of the other three places.)
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 Population Estimates
<http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2014/index.html>
<http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/gazetteer.html>
U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013 American Community Survey
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_5YR/B01003/1600000US0477415>
7
Number of places and townships in the United States that are named Cranberry, a popular side dish at Thanksgiving. Cranberry township (Butler County), Pa., was the most populous of these places in 2014, with 30,170 residents. Cranberry township (Venango County), Pa., was next (6,546).
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 Population Estimates and 2010 Census Summary File 1
<http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2014/index.html>
32
Number of counties, places and townships in the United States named Plymouth, as in Plymouth Rock, the landing site of the first Pilgrims. The two counties, both named Plymouth, are in Massachusetts (507,022) and Iowa (24,874).
Plymouth, Minn., is the most populous place, with 75,057 residents in 2014. There are two places in the United States named Pilgrim: one, a township in Dade County, Mo., had a population of 129; the other, a census designated place in Michigan, had a population of 36. And then there is Mayflower, Ark., whose population was 2,345, and Mayflower Village, Calif., whose population was 5,662.
Note: Townships have been included in these counts from 12 states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin) where the primary governmental or administrative divisions of a county serve as general-purpose local governments that can perform the same governmental functions as incorporated places. These county subdivisions are known as minor civil divisions, and the Census Bureau presents data for these in all products for which place data are provided.
(Please note that population totals for the two places on the list that are census designated places — Pilgrim, Mich., and Mayflower Village, Calif. — pertain to the 2009-2013 American Community Survey.)

Participants in the First Feast

24.4 million
Number of U.S. residents of English ancestry as of 2014. Some could very well be descendants of the Plymouth colonists who participated in the autumn feast that is widely believed to be one of the first Thanksgivings — especially the 655,000 living in Massachusetts.
Source: 2014 American Community Survey, Table B04006
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/14_1YR/B04006>
6,500
Number of members of the Wampanoag American Indian tribal grouping, as of 2010, roughly half of whom reside in Massachusetts. The Wampanoag, the American Indians in attendance, played a lead role in this historic encounter, and they had been essential to the survival of the colonists during the newcomers’ first year. The Wampanoag are a people with a sophisticated society who have occupied the region for thousands of years. They have their own government, their own religious and philosophical beliefs, their own knowledge system, and their own culture. They are also a people for whom giving thanks was a part of daily life.
Sources: 2010 Census American Indian and Alaska Native Summary File, Table DP-1
<http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2010/cph-t/t-6tables/TABLE%20(1).pdf >
American Indian Perspectives on Thanksgiving, National Museum of the American Indian
<http://nmai.si.edu/sites/1/files/pdf/education/thanksgiving_poster.pdf>

Preparing the Feast … Enjoying the Day … and the Aftermath

98.6%
Percentage of households in 2011 with a gas or electric stove — essential for cooking their Thanksgiving feast. Another 96.8 percent had a microwave, also helpful in preparing the meal.
Source: Extended Measures of Well-Being: Living Conditions in the United States: 2011,
Table 3 <http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p70-136.pdf>
98.3%
Percentage of households with a television in 2011. No doubt, many guests either before, after or perhaps even during the feast will settle in front of their TVs to watch some football.
Source: Extended Measures of Well-Being: Living Conditions in the United States: 2011, Table 3
<http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p70-136.pdf>
35.8%
Percentage of households with a stand-alone food freezer in 2011, which they may want to use to preserve their Thanksgiving leftovers. Far more (99.2 percent) have a refrigerator. Once all the guests leave, it will be time to clean up. Fortunately, 69.3 percent have a dishwasher to make the task easier.
Source: Extended Measures of Well-Being: Living Conditions in the United States: 2011, Table 3
<http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p70-136.pdf>

Culinary Delights

66,286
The number of supermarkets and other grocery (except convenience) stores in the United States in 2013. These establishments are expected to be extremely busy around Thanksgiving as people prepare for their delightful meals.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 County Business Patterns, NAICS Code 44511
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~44511>
3,235
The number of baked goods stores in the United States in 2013 — a potential place to visit to purchase tasty desserts.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 County Business Patterns, NAICS Code 445291
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~445291>
2,761
The number of fruit and vegetable markets in the United States in 2013 — a great place to find holiday side dishes.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 County Business Patterns, NAICS Code 445230
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~445230>
228 million
The forecast for the number of turkeys the United States will raise in 2015. That is down 4 percent from the number raised during 2014.
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
<http://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Todays_Reports/reports/tuky0915.pdf>
40.0 million
The forecast for the number of turkeys Minnesota will raise in 2015. The Gopher State was tops in turkey production, followed by North Carolina (29 million), Arkansas (27 million), Indiana (19.1 million), Missouri (18 million) and Virginia (17.4 million).
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
<http://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Todays_Reports/reports/tuky0915.pdf>
$24 million
The value of U.S. imports of live turkeys for 2014, with 100 percent of them coming from Canada. When it comes to sweet potatoes, the Dominican Republic was the source of 48.8 percent ($6.6 million) of total imports ($13.6 million). The United States ran a $16.5 million trade deficit in live turkeys during the period but had a surplus of $98.3 million in sweet potatoes.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Economic Indicators Division
<https://usatrade.census.gov/>
841 million pounds
The forecast for U.S. cranberry production in 2015. Wisconsin was estimated to lead all states in the production of cranberries, with 503 million pounds, followed by Massachusetts (estimated at 211 million). New Jersey, Oregon and Washington were also estimated to have substantial production, ranging from 18 million to 59 million pounds.
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
<http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/New_Jersey/Publications/Current_News_Release/Cran2015.pdf>
3.0 billion pounds
The total weight of sweet potatoes — another popular Thanksgiving side dish — produced by major sweet potato producing states in 2014.
Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
<http://www.nass.usda.gov/Data_and_Statistics>