KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom
Department Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Degree Title (if applicable) Education Doctorate (Ed.D.)
Proposed Effective Date Fall 2006
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
x
New Course Proposal
Course Title Change
Course Number Change
Course Credit Change
Course Prerequisite Change
Course Description Change
Sections to be Completed
II, III, IV, V, VII
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
Notes:
If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a
new number should be proposed.
A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new
program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the
program.
Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.
Submitted by:
Faculty Member
Approved
_____
Date
Not Approved
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Department Chair
Date
School Curriculum Committee
Date
School Dean
Date
GPCC Chair
Date
Dean, Graduate Studies
Date
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
Approved
Not Approved
President
Date
Page 1 of 13
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I.
Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Credit Hours
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II.
Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number ECE 8140 _____________________
Course Title _Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Acceptance to the Ed.D. program
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course will present current content about law and legal principles that apply to schools. Careful
examination of issues related to the impact of current law on the classroom will be studied
III.
Justification
As our society becomes more litigious, it is important that teachers understand educational laws and the
impact these laws have on educational decisions. Teachers who become leaders for learning must not only
know curriculum but also become legally-literate. Opportunities to be effective school leaders occur
throughout the day as teachers share experiences, collaborate about teaching and learning or simply ask
questions of each other. It is through these opportunities that distributed school leadership becomes a
powerful force in our educational system. These teacher leaders must be well versed in the laws and
impact of laws on the schools
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor:
Text:
 American Psychological Association, Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association, (5th ed) Washington, DC: Author
 Alexander, K & Alexander M. D. (2001) American Public School Law (5th).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
 Fischer, Schimmel, & Stellman (2003) Teachers and the Law (6th). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
 LaMorte, M. W. (2002). School Law: Cases and concepts (7th). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Page 2 of 13
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.D. program
Objectives:
Course objectives
Doctoral
KSDS
1c
Distributed School
Leadership Roles
Change Leader,
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.6
2. become aware of the conflicting views about legal policies and
practices
1b, 1c
Learning &
Development Leader,
Change Leader
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
3 develop knowledge about law and legal principles that apply to
schools
4. gain insights into the level of public school teachers knowledge of
legal issues
1c
Change Leader,
1.6
1b, 1c.
Learning &
Development Leader,
Change Leader
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
5. become an active agent of change to enhance teacher knowledge of
educational legal issues
1b, 1c, 2e
Learning &
Development Leader,
Change Leader,
Learning &
Development Leader,
Process Improvement
Leader, Performance
Leader
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1. develop sensitivity to the legal aspects of education
Instructional Method
Lecture
Class Discussions
Group and Individual Work
Use of Technology
Peer Evaluation
Method of Evaluation
Individual Assignment
Write a position paper about one educational law currently in place--100 points
(CPI )
Identify and discuss five of the school laws that have the most impact on your
classroom teaching--100 points (CPI )
Analysis and Synthesis of survey of teacher’ current educational legal knowledge-100 points (CPI)
Identify and write a paper of realistic ways to expand teachers’ knowledge of legal
issues--100 points (CPI )
Page 3 of 13
Group Assignment
Contribute quality content to large/small group discussions S/U
Develop and administer a survey to examine teacher’s current knowledge of
educational law 100 points (CPI)
Exploration and oral discussion of 2 current educational laws not presented in
class—S/U
Three points will be subtracted from the final average for each “U” received.
A:
B:
C:
F:
V.
92% - 100%
84% - 91%
75% - 83%
75% or lower
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
*Course funding is addressed in a comprehensive manner in the comprehensive proposal for the umbrella
Ed.D degree for the Bagwell College of Education.
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
TOTAL
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth
VI. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the
Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President.
The form is required for all new courses.
DISCIPLINE
COURSE NUMBER
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
(Note: Limit 16 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
EECE
ECE 8140
School Law
3
Fall 2006
Regular
Page 4 of 13
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee
VII Attach Syllabus
Page 5 of 13
Elementary and Early Childhood Education
ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department of Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Semester, Fall, 2006
I.
ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom
II.
INSTRUCTOR: to be assigned
Kennesaw Hall Room xxx
Office Phone- xxxxx
e-mail xxxxx
III.
CLASS MEETINGS: TBA
IV:
TEXTS selection that could be chosen for ECE 8xxx Assessment of Learning)
American Psychological Association, Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association,
(5th ed) Washington, DC: Author
Alexander, K & Alexander M. D. (2001) American Public School Law (5th). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Fischer, Schimmel, & Stellman (2003) Teachers and the Law (6th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon
LaMorte, M. W. (2002). School Law: Cases and concepts (7th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Website http://spirit.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/1yris.pl?join=legalclips
Also you will need to bring an APA Style Manual (hard copy or CD) and computer disks to class
everyday. Those students who own laptop computers should bring those to class, too.
V.
CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTIONS:
ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law in the Classroom
This course will present current content about law and legal principles that apply to schools. Careful
examination of issues related to the impact of current law on the classroom will be studied.
VI. PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
As our society becomes more litigious, it is important that teachers understand educational laws and the
impact these laws have on educational decisions. Teachers who become leaders for learning must not only
know curriculum but also become legally-literate. Opportunities to be effective school leaders occur
throughout the day as teachers share experiences, collaborate about teaching and learning or simply ask
questions of each other. It is through these opportunities that distributed school leadership becomes a
powerful force in our educational system. These teacher leaders must be well versed in the laws and
impact of laws on the schools.
Page 6 of 13
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY
Collaborative development of expertise in teaching and learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise
among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and
expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in
classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the
development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader.
Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an endstate. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning are
entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and
reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and
facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values and demonstrates
collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large.
Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other
professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high
levels of learning.
Knowledge Base
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: preservice, induction, inservice, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise
is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of
expertise is central to preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during
the continuum phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming
Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that expertise is not an
end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology : Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher preparation
program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet Georgia
Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore
and use instructional media. They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and
Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources
VII.
Course Objectives:
ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law in the Classroom
Course objectives
Doctoral
KSDS
1. develop sensitivity to the legal aspects of education
1c
Distributed
School
Leadership Roles
Change Leader,
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.6
2. become aware of the conflicting views about legal policies and practices
1b, 1c
Learning &
Development
Leader, Change
Leader
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
3 develop knowledge about law and legal principles that apply to schools
1c
Change Leader,
1.6
4. gain insights into the level of public school teachers knowledge of legal issues
1b, 1c.
Learning &
Development
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
Page 7 of 13
Leader, Change
Leader
5. become an active agent of change to enhance teacher knowledge of
educational legal issues
1b, 1c, 2e
Learning &
Development
Leader, Change
Leader, Learning
& Development
Leader, Process
Improvement
Leader,
Performance
Leader
Georgia's Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational Leadership
Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles
COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
Individual Assignment
Write a position paper about one educational law currently in place--100 points (CPI )
Identify and discuss five of the school laws that have the most impact on your classroom teaching-100 points (CPI )
Analysis and Synthesis of survey of teacher’ current educational legal knowledge--100 points (CPI)
Identify and write a paper of realistic ways to expand teachers’ knowledge of legal issues--100 points
(CPI )
Group Assignment
Contribute quality content to large/small group discussions S/U
Develop and administer a survey to examine teacher’s current knowledge of educational law 100
points (CPI)
Exploration and oral discussion of 2 current educational laws not presented in class—S/U
Three points will be subtracted from the final average for each “U” received.
VIII.
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Grading:
93-100%
85-92 %
A
B
77-84%
C
69-76%
D
<69%
F
IX. Policies
Page 8 of 13
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
Diversity: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different
learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of
differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural
classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second
element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in
employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age, disability, ethnicity,
family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion, sexual orientation, and
socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the consideration of
cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as
disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
A number of services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In
order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support
Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is
required.
Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address
each of the multicultural variables outlined above.
Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in
an ethical, professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs abide by the policies and guidelines
established by the university in their expectations for candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and
adhering to the guidelines of academic honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to
have violated these guidelines will be subject to disciplinary action consistent with university policy. For example,
plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic Honesty policies could result in a grade of “F” in the
course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary Committee.
Professionalism- Participation and Attendance: Part of your success in this class is related to your ability to
provide peer reviews and feedback to your editing groups regarding their research and their writing. Furthermore,
responding effectively and appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s
professionalism. In addition, since each class meeting represents a week of instruction/learning, failure to attend
class will likely impact your performance on assignments and final exams. Please be prepared with all readings
completed prior to class. We depend on one another to ask pertinent and insightful questions.
X. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Court-Ordered Desegregation
Charles Ogletree, All Deliberate Speed (2004) (Selected Pages)
– I, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka – II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955)
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1970)
Memorandum Decision and Order, San Francisco NAACP v. SFUSD (October 2001)
Amy Stuart Wells, Jennifer Jellison Holme, Anita Tijerina Revilla, and Awo Korantemaa Atanda, “How
Desegregation Changes Us: The Effects of Racially Mixed Schools on Students and Society,” drawn from
forthcoming book (2006) In Search of Brown.
Louisville,” from Diversity Challenged, (Gary Orfield, ed.) (2001)
Page 9 of 13
Voluntary Desegregation
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)
th
Eisenberg v. Montgomery County Public Schools, 197 F.3d 123 (4 Cir. 1999)
Hunter v. Regents of the University of California, 190 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 1999)
Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
Brief of Amici Curiae American Council on Education, Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
Brief of Amici Curiae Lt. Gen. Julius W. Becton, Jr. et al., Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
st
Comfort v. Lynn School Committee, 2005 WL 1404464 (1 Cir. 2005)
Brief of Amici Curiae for the Council of the Great City Schools, et al. Comfot v. Lynn (2003)
Melanie Killen, "Developmental Psychology and the Argument for School Desegregation," SRCD
Developments: The Society for Research in Childhood Newsletter (January, 2003).
"School Choice: Doing it the Right Way Makes a Difference," The Brookings Institution (November 2003).
Richard Kahlenberg, “Chapter 4: The Significance of the Socioeconomic Makeup of Schools” & “Chapter 6:
How Socioeconomic Integration Can Be Achieved in Practice,” from All Together Now (2001).
“Closing the Gap: Moving From Rhetoric to Reality,” NAACP Legal Defense Fund (June 23, 2005)
FERPA
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. § 1232(g)
th
United Staes of Ameica v. Miami University, 294 F.3d 797 (6 t r Cir. 2002)
Burt v. Rumsfeld, 354 F.Supp.2d 156 (D.Conn 2005)
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title IX, Part D, Sec. 9528
Policy Guidance: Access to High School Students and Information on Students by Military Recruiters
(October 9, 2002)
Joint DOE/DOD letter to Chief State Officers About LEA Release of Information to Military Recruiters (July
2, 2003).
DOE Letter to Superintendents on FERPA (January 2004) (including commentary on requirements for the
release of information to military recruiters).
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title I
� The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title I
Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now v. New York City Department of Education, 269
F.Supp.2d 338 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)
Kegerreis v. United States of America, 2003 WL 22327188 (D.Kan. 2003)
“Public School Choice: Non-Regulatory Guidance,” U.S. Department of Education (February 6, 2004)
High-Stakes Testing
Debra P. v. Turlington, 644 F.2d 397 (5th Cir. 1981)
Board of Education of Northport-East Northport Union Free School District v. Ambach, 436 N.Y.S.2d 564
(N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1981)
Triplett v. Livingston County Board of Education, 967 S.W.2d 25 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997)
GI Forum, Image de Tejas v. Texas Education Agency, 87 F.Supp.2d 667 (W.D. Tex. 2000)
Student No. 9 v. Board of Education, 802 N.E.2d 105 (Mass. 2004)
The Use of Tests as Part of High-Stakes Decision-Making for Students: A Resource Guide for Educators
and Policy-Makers, U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, (December 2000)
Racial Harassment
Raad v. Fairbanks North Star Borough School District, 323 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2003)
Virginia v. Black, 123 S.Ct. 1536 (2003)
Page 10 of 13
Investigative Guidance on Racial Incidents and Harassment Against Students at Educational Institutions,
Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, Federal Register, 59 FR 11,448 (March 10, 1994)
Regulations for Title VI of the CRA1964, 65 FR 68,050 (November 13, 2000).
Gender-Based Decision Making
Title IX
U.S. v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996)
Chipman v. Grant County School District, 30 F.Supp.2d 975 (1998)
Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 125 S.Ct. 1497 (2005).
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Section 5131
Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, “Guidelines on Current Title IX Requirements Related to
Single-Sex Classes and Schools” (2002).
“Additional Clarification of Intercollegiate Athletics Policy: Three Part Test – Part Three” (Additional
Clarification), Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education (March 17, 2005).
34 CFR Part 106: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving
Federal Financial Assistance; Proposed Rules, Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, (March
9, 2004).
The Secretary of Education’s Commission on Opportunity in Athletics, “Open to All: Title IX at Thirty”
(executive summary) (February 28, 2003)
Sexual Orientation
Romer v. Evans, 116 S.Ct. 1620 (1996)
Williamson v. A.G. Edwards and Sons, Inc., 876 F.2d 69 (8th Cir.1989)
Wrightson v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc., 99 F.3d 138 (4th Cir. 1996)
Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, 523 U.S. 75 (1998)
Schroeder v. Hamilton School District, 282 F.3d 946 (7th Cir. 2002)
Flores v. Morgan Hill Unified School District, 324 F.3d 1130 (9th Cir. 2003)
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000)
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Section 9525
Sexual Harassment
Title VII
Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986)
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 524 U. First Amendment: Religion
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 US 205, (1972)
Employment Division v. Smith, 494 US 872 (1990)
Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992)
Agostini v. Felton, 117 S.Ct. 1997 (1997)
Mitchell v. Helms, 530 U.S. 793 (2000)
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000)
Good News Club v. Milford, 533 U.S. 98 (2001)
Brown v. Gilmore, 533 U.S. 1301 (2001)
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002)
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004)
Locke v. Davey, 540 U.S. 712 (2004)
McCreary County v. ACLU, 2005 WL 1498988 (2005).
Van Orden v. Perry, 2005 WL 1500276 (2005).
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Section 9524
“Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools,” U.S.
Department of Education (February 7, 2003).
Page 11 of 13
First Amendment: Speech
Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1968)
Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982)
Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986)
Hazelwood School Ditrict v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1987)
Boroff v. Van Wert City Board of Education, 220 F.3d 465 (2000)
Scott v. School Board of Alachua County, 324 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir. 2003)
Fourth Amendment: Privacy
New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985)
Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995)
Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls, 122 S.Ct.
2559 (2002)
th
Beard v. Whitmore Lake School District, 402 F.3d 598 (6 Cir. 2005) English Language Learners
Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974)
Guadalupe Organization, Inc. v. Tempe Elementary School District, 587 F.2d 1022 (9th Cir. 1978)
Keyes v. Shool Disict No. 1, Denver, Colorado, 576 F.Supp 1503 (D. Colo. 1983)
Valeria v. Wilson, 12 F.Supp.2d 1007 (N.D. Ca. 1998)
th
Valeria v. Davis, 307 F.3d 1036 (9 Cir. 2002)
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title III
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Department of Education, 69 FR 35462 (June 24, 2004).
Final Rule Stage, Department of Education, 70 FR 26797-01 (May 16, 2005).
Illegal Aliens
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)
“Bill Summary and Status of S.1545, the Development, Relief, and Education Act for Alien Minors Act
of 2003 (the DREAM Act).”
“A Summary of the DREAM Act,” National Immigration Law Center (February 2005).
Special Education
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. 108-446 (codified at 20 U.S.C.
§ 1400 et al.). http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/idea2004.html (link to bill at the bottom of
the page).
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982)
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro, 144 S.Ct. 3371 (1984)
Florence County School District 4 v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993)
Cedar Rapids Community School v. Garre, 119 S.Ct. 992 (1999)
th
Weast v. Shaffer, 377 F.3d 449 (4 Cir. 2004)
Department of Education, Title I – Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged, 34 CFR
Part 200 (December 9, 2003)
Spirit of Brown v. Board Lacking in Special Ed, Researchers Say,” Education Daily (June 3, 2004)
“GAO assails ED Response to Special Ed Violations,” Education Daily (May 24, 2004)
“Republicans Won’t Commit to Pre-Conference on IDEA,” Education Daily (June 7, 2004)
“States Urge Senate Democrats to Drop IDEA Pre-Conference,” Education Daily (June 10, 2004)
“IDEA Reauthorization: ‘Frivolous’ Proposal Demands Attorneys Know Letter of the Law,” Education
Daily (June 16, 2004)
“NCD: Keep Expectations High for Special Ed Students,” Education Daily (June 8, 2004)
The NCLB Twenty-Percent Rule, 34 CFR 200.48.
Page 12 of 13
“Republicans Won’t Commit to Pre-Conference on IDEA,” Education Daily (June 7, 2004)
“States Urge Senate Democrats to Drop IDEA Pre-Conference,” Education Daily (June 10, 2004)
“IDEA Reauthorization: ‘Frivolous’ Proposal Demands Attorneys Know Letter of the Law,” Education
Daily (June 16, 2004)
“NCD: Keep Expectations High for Special Ed Students,” Education Daily (June 8, 2004)
The NCLB Twenty-Percent Rule, 34 CFR 200.48.
Page 13 of 13