No Child Left Behind and Special Education

1
No Child Left Behind and Special Education

• Presented by
• Erica L. Matos, MA, EdS
• Phillipsburg School District

2
NCLB THE LAW

• No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (20 U.S.C. 6301,
  et seq) signed into law on January 8, 2002 by
  President Bush
• Primary purpose of NCLB is to address the
  achievement gap of students with disabilities,
  minorities, and economically disadvantaged
  students

3

• The purpose of this title to ensure that all
  children have a fair, equal, and significant
  opportunity to obtain a high-quality education
  and reach, as a minimum, proficiency on
  challenging State academic achievement standards
  and state academic assessments.

4
NCLB seeks to accomplish its purpose by

• Ensuring that academic assessments,
  accountability systems, teacher training,
  curriculum, and materials are aligned with
  challenging academic standards
• Meeting needs of low-achieving students and
  student groups as designated above
• Distributing and targeting resources to make a
  difference where needs are greatest
• Improving and strengthening accountability,
  teaching and learning through statewide
  assessment systems

• Closing the achievement gap between and high- and
  low-performing children
• Holding schools and States accountable for
  improving the academic achievement of all
  students, identifying and changing low-performing
  schools, and providing alternatives to students
  in such schools
• Providing greater decision-making authority and
  flexibility to schools and teachers in exchange
  for greater responsibility for student performance

5

• Providing enriched and accelerated educational
  programs
• Promoting school-wide reform based on effective,
  scientifically based instructional strategies and
  challenging academic content

• Elevating the quality of instruction through
  professional development
• Coordinating services
• Affording parents the opportunities to
  participate in the education of their children

6
Special Education??

• At least 95 of each group of students enrolled
  in schools are required to take the state
  assessments
• Accommodations, guidelines, and alternative
  assessments are to be provided as per the
  Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
• Alternate assessments are designed for students
  who cannot participate in all or part of the
  state assessment, according to their IEPs, even
  with appropriate accomodations

7

• Those who will not participate are those students
  whose disability is so severe that the student
  is not receiving instruction in any of the
  knowledge and skills measured by the Statewide
  assessment and the student cannot complete any of
  the questions on the assessment in a subject area
  with or without accommodations.
• The Alternate Proficiency Assessment (APA) must
  yield results in the same core subject areas as
  the regular statewide assessment program in
  accordance with NCLB, and according to IDEA, must
  be implemented by July 1, 2002

8
Annual Yearly Progress (AYP)

• Each state is required to develop a State
  Accountability Workbook which is essentially
  their action plan for implementation of NCLB
  requirements in that state. The plans must
  demonstrate that the state has adopted a single
  statewide accountability system for AYP for all
  public school students
• The definition for AYP in each state must be
  primarily based on academic indicators, be
  technically rigorous, and apply school, district,
  and state levels of progress
• AYP must also address the inclusion of all of the
  specific subgroups of students, and their
  progress toward the ultimate goal in 2014

9
AYP in New Jersey

• Almost three quarters of the public high schools
  in New Jersey failed to make AYP in 2002, the
  first year after the baseline was established
• The list of these schools, released by the state
  in the beginning of October 2003 includes wealthy
  and poor districts, and some of the highest
  achieving and nationally recognized programs

10
Problem?

• The primary stumbling block for most f these
  schools has been the requirement that all
  disaggregated groups meet AYP in order for a
  school to be considered as attaining proficiency
  the problem? Special Education.
• Out of 40 indicators, many failed to make AYP in
  only one or two indicators (special education
  Language Arts and/or special education Math
  assessment)

11

• Complicating the issue of special education is
  the delay in the federal Department of
  Educations regulations for testing students with
  significant cognitive disabilities and including
  these results in school ratings
• Right now, the definition of this group has been
  limited to one percent of the total student
  population, and students whose intellectual
  functioning and adaptive behavior are three or
  more standard deviations below the norm this
  equates to students with IQs of 55 or less

12

• Standardized tests are probably the worst measure
  of special education students, who are so labeled
  due to learning differences
• Many in the special education field speculate
  that the frustration and failure of
  individualized students will result in increased
  drop-out rates for these students, who
  self-esteem is often low to begin with

13

• The responsibility of special education students
  assessment scores for the failing status of the
  school stigmatizes an already stigmatized
  population

14
NCLB vs. IDEA

• Another issue in the implementation of NCLB for
  special education students is the conflict
  between NCLB and IDEA.
• NCLB places emphasis on measuring these students
  as all others, with no exceptions
• IDEA fosters the concept of individualized
  education programs that focus on the specific
  needs of each student separate and apart from
  other students

15

• NCLB removes the ability of the interdisciplinary
  IEP team to determine the needs of the student
  and plan accordingly
• All students are to be measured against the same
  standards, on the same assessments
• Unless the regulatory guidance for special
  education students under NCLB changes to reflect
  these needs, schools and those working with
  special needs students will have to shift the
  focus of all instruction to getting students
  through the test

16

• The No Child Left Behind Act is a sweeping piece
  of federal legislation that demands high
  expectations for all students
• Whether it is realistic to expect that all
  students can achieve at the same level is not as
  relevant as moving the barriers that exist and
  developing programs to provide the opportunity
  for equal achievement to occur

17
References

• 20 U.S.C.S. 6301 et seq. (No Child Left Behind
  Act, January, 2002).
• 20 U.S.C.S. 1412 (Individuals with Disabilities
  Education Act, 1997).
• Mooney, J. (2003). NJ issues high school
  warnings, Newark Star Ledger. Section 1, pp.1
  5.
• Mooney, J. (2003). Schools confront higher
  special education standards, Star Ledger.
  Retrieved from www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/n
  ews-4/106775539313690.xml?staredger?nnj

18

• NJEA. (2003). Collision course Parents are
  satisfied, yet our best schools are being labeled
  failures. Newark Star Ledger, Section 1, p. 10.
• NJEA. (2003). Its called special education for
  a reason No Child Left Behind unfairly
  stigmatized special needs students. Newark Star
  Ledger, Section 10, p. 7.
• No State Left Behind The Challenges and
  Opportunities of ESEA 2001, prepared by Education
  Commission of the States, State Education Policy
  Network. Retrieved from www.ecs.org/html/Special/
  ESEA/NSLB_sl.htm
• NCLB State Report Card. (2002). Retrieved from
  www.nj.gov/njded

19

• State of NJ Consolidated State Application
  Accountability Workbook No Child Left Behind in
  NJ. Final Submission April 30, 2003. Retrieved
  from www.nj.gov/njded
• Students with Disabilities and the New Jersey
  Statewide Assessment System. Retrieved from
  www.nj.gov.njded/specialed/sas_brochure.htm