OSERS Letter to States Regarding Virtual Schools & IDEA Requirements

This guidance from the Office of Special Ed & Rehabilitative Services addresses the general supervision responsibilities by states and the applicability of IDEA’s child find provisions to children attending public virtual schools. The letter also clarifies the responsibility for providing a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to children with disabilities attending these schools. 

I am not aware of any rules or guidance that TEA has developed.  Many issues arise with virtual schools & students with disabilities – childfind; LRE; provision of related services & specially designed instruction; state assessments, etc. 

For information on this letter,  http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-education-department-releases-guidance-education-children-disabilities-attending-public-virtual-schools

Post by Chuck Noe, PRN Education Specialist


Higher Expectations to Better Outcomes for Children with Disabilities

Article by Michael Yudin, Acting Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services at the U.S. Department of Education

President Obama has said that we are stronger when America fields a full team. Unfortunately, too many of the 6.5 million children and youth with disabilities in this country leave high school without the knowledge and skills they need to be successful in a 21st century, global economy. While the vast majority of students in special education do not have significant cognitive impairments that prohibit them from learning rigorous academic content, fewer than 10 percent of eighth graders with disabilities are proficient in reading and math on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Too often, students’ educational opportunities are limited by low expectations. We must do better.

That’s why the Department is changing the way it holds states accountable for the education of students with disabilities. For many years, the Department primarily focused on whether states were meeting the procedural requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Generally, we have seen significant improvement in compliance.

But if kids are leaving high school without the ability to read or do math at a high-school level, compliance is simply not enough. This year, we also focused on improving results when we made determinations as to whether states are effective in meeting the requirements and purposes of IDEA.

With this year’s IDEA determinations, we looked at multiple outcome measures of student performance, including the participation of students with disabilities in state assessments, proficiency gaps in reading and math between students with disabilities and all students, and performance in reading and math on NAEP.

I believe this change in accountability represents a significant and long-overdue raising of the bar for special education. Last year, when we only considered compliance data in making annual determinations, 41 states and territories met requirements.

2014-chart-2

This year, however, when we include data on how students are actually performing, only 18 states and territories meet requirements.

2014-chart-1

In enacting IDEA, Congress recognized that improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities. We must do everything we can to support states, school districts, and educators to improve results for students with disabilities. We must have higher expectations for our children, and hold ourselves as a nation accountable for their success.

Article was published on the HOMEROOM blog on June 25, 2014


IDEA Guidance from the DOE

The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) at the U.S. Department of Education regularly provides guidance to the field on the nation’s special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). “Guidance” can take several forms:

  • OSEP’s correspondence in response to questions received from the field;
  • policy documents and letters on priority issues; and
  • non-regulatory guidance.

All are intended to clarify elements of the law and its regulations. Often, OSEP responds directly to questions from state and local special education directors. These letters are an important part of understanding IDEA and how to implement it.

Continue Reading