Aligning Education Laws
to Effective Learning
Frameworks
Kim Mendenhall, Ph.D.
Policy & Frameworks of
Support
• Since early parental advocacy, policy
has been moving in the direction of
educational integration and justice
for all.
• Frameworks that support learning &
achievement align with policy tenets.
1965
ESEA (Elementary & Secondary
Education Act)
For “educationally disadvantaged”
1970s
EHA (Education for All Handicapped
Children Act) 1975 (P.L. 94-142)
UD (Universal Design)
FAPE/LRE
Physical Access
1990s
IDEA (Individuals with Disability
Education Act 1990 (EHA
reauthorized)
UDL (Universal Design for
Learning)
Access to learning
Access to Learning
2000s
NCLB – No Child Left Behind
(ESEA reauthorized - 2001)
IDEA 2004
Greater accountability
for student
achievement
Greater accountability
for student
achievement
Greater involvement
in general curriculum
Greater involvement
in general curriculum
2000s continued...
IDEA 2004
UDL
MTSS – system of
assessment & evidencebased practice
Framework of assessment
& research-validated
instructional options
MTSS/UDL
MTSS (Multi-tiered
System of Supports)
UDL
Effective Instruction – researchvalidated
Flexible learning opportunities –
research-validated
Assessment
Assessment
Interventions – teacher practices;
Response – progress within
intervention
Implementing engaging activities
that support access to general
curriculum
Discussion
IDEA
2004
UDL
MTSS
ESEA
Policy Foundations of
IDEA 2004
Raised the bar for assuring access to general education curriculum
MTSS as a framework for academic support and identification for
services
Established the National Instructional Materials Accessibility
Standard (NIMAS) – greater access to general curriculum through
technology
“...shift from focus on access to a focus on learning” (Rose et al., 2009, p.
151)
sets precedence for further research and development in new technology
for the benefit of all students
integrate technology with policy and practice
Prepare students for challenges present in a competitive and
advancing world.
(Gordan, 2009; Karger, 2009; Rose et al., 2009; OSEP, 2007)
Policy Foundations of
ESEA Reauthorized (NCLB) & Current
Driven by student performance
Push for greater educational outcomes
Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) – effective
forthcoming reauthorization should be built on “the
theme of IDEA” (CEC, 2010, pg. 1):
Focus on individual need
Better teachers
Ensure success and high levels of achievement
(Forte, 2010; CEC, 2010)
IDEA 2004 & ESEA
Both laws require
states to establish higher and measurable standards and
goals for students with disabilities and non-disabled
peers
Alignment of assessments with standards
Improvement of teacher leadership
Early intervention services (EIS)
Accountability for struggling readers
Both support goal of providing appropriate education
for students with disabilities
(D. Fuchs, Fuchs, & Stecker, 2010; Hardman, 2006; Lieberman & Walker, 2007)
Alignment of
IDEA 2004 & ESEA
Attend to diverse instructional and individual needs of
students in the general curriculum
Greater focus on accountability, progress, and student
outcomes
Need for greater alignment with special and general
education
“Scientifically-based” research
Allocation of excess funds from IDEA-Part B for schoolwide
programs and ESEA activities as determined by LEA
Unified indicators to determine progress towards goals
(Hardman, 2006; Hehir, 2009: OSERS, 2007)
Alignment of
IDEA 2004 & ESEA cont...
Recommendations:
Find a balance with IDEA
Congress “recognize differing levels of progress toward
accountability matched with appropriate supports”
(CEC, 2010, p. 11)
Accommodations during instruction and assessment
within a UDL framework based on individual need
(CEC, 2010; Rose, Hall, & Murray, 2009)
Vision of IDEA & ESEA
Address student needs in a more inclusionary way
Fair and equitable in meeting the needs of all students
Improve outcomes
High quality standards for teachers and learning
Greater opportunity for ALL to learn (including children
with disabilities)
Greater collaboration between educators
MTSS and UDL as a joint system of support
(CEC, 2010; Blanton et al., 2011; Basham et al.,
2010;Strangman et al., 2009)
Instructional Framework of MTSS
“...make general and special education a seamless
system” (Division for Lerning Disabilities, 2007 p. 3)
Teacher practices = INTERVENTION
Progress within the intervention = RESPONSE
Provides early intervention and instructional supports
for ALL students
(Kalberg et al., 2010; Sailor, 2009; Stangman et al., 2009;
VanDerHeyden & Burns, 2011)
Benefits/Features of MTSS
Research-validated core curriculum
Framework of supportive tiered interventions
Universal screening and progress monitoring
Use of data for instructional decisions and monitoring
progress
3+ levels of support:
Tier 1 – universal/primary
Tier 2 – supplemental
Tier 3 – tertiary/intense
Instructional Framework of UDL
Encourages flexible learning opportunities & student
choice
Eliminate barriers:
Meeting goals
Utilizing materials
Conducting assessment
Provide research-validated options for ALL learners to
Acquire information
Become engaged
Express themselves
(Basham et al., 2010; CAST, 2011; Jimenez et al., 2007; Rose &
Gravel, 2009; Stangman et al., 2009
Benefits/Features of UDL
Improvement in student productivity, performance, and
behavior
More engagement and enthusiasm for learning
Greater focus on student need
More collaboration
Greater enthusiasm for teaching
Reduction in special education referrals
Improved test scores
Curricular enhancement through use of technology
(Gordon 2009; Rose, 2009; Sopko, 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL
Emphasis of both:
Effective instruction
Research-validated curriculum
Differentiating instruction
Assessment – inform instruction & intervention
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont...
UDL ≈ MTSS
Encouraging flexibility
Research-validated instruction & curriculum
MTSS ≈ UDL
Screening students
Progress monitoring
Decision on course of action
Tiers of support
(Stangman et al., 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont...
Access to learning environments
MTSS = Tiers of support
UDL = modifying curriculum, accommodations
Researchers – effective decision making
Aligning UDL & MTSS
Focus on preventing difficulties
Differentiation
Instruction – engages & motivates
(Basham, 2010; Hehir, 2009;Jimenez et al., 2007; Stangman et al., 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont...
IDEA 2004 – UDL Assistive Technology Act
Rose (2009)
Appropriating educational funds – innovative
technology:
Assistive technology
Digital curricula – digital representation displayed in a
variety of ways more effectively than print
UDL framework for ALL students
Continuum of funding – advancing assistive &
augmentative technology
Innovative technology – accessible for ALL students
(Edyburn, 2010; Rose, 2009; Sopko, 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont...
IDEA 2004 – NIMAS
Further development & alignment of curriculum &
assistive technologies
UDL & technologies
Breakdown of barriers
Greater access
MTSS & UDL
Bridge special and general education
Ensure “that all children reach a high level of
achievement” (CEC, 2010, p. 1)
(CEC, 2010; Rose et al., 2009)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified
MTSS & UDL
IDEA & ESEA united
Access to curriculum
High quality education – bridge between special and general
education
IDEA & ESEA separate
Meeting high performance = could overshadow meeting
student needs
IDEA provides a balance to high standards of ESEA
(Hehir, 2009; Karger, 2009; Owen, 2011)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified
MTSS & UDL cont...
IDEA
Identify students with disabilities
Provide fair and appropriate academic experience
ESEA
Provided accountability to carry out “IDEA’s goal of
aiding disabled students’ educational achievement”
(Owen, 2011, p. 9) at a time when expectations and
accountability for their teaching and learning was
suffering.
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified
MTSS & UDL cont...
Next reauthorization
Cohesion & balance between general & special education
More prepared and stronger workforce of educators
Equal access to assessment and accountability for ALL
students
Meeting needs & improving outcomes of ALL students
(included gifted learners)
Balancing IDEA & ESEA within a collaborative system of
support
Implementing UDL – unbiased assessment tool for students
Accommodations with individual needs in mind
School wide plans – include UDL & MTSS
Increase in ESEA funding for school improvement
(OSERS, 2007)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified
MTSS & UDL cont...
Researchers suggest:
Differentiation of research-validated curriculum in
unified MTSS & UDL frameworks –
Fewer tiers needed for intervention with an increase in
universal student response
Great emphasis on effective instruction and curriculum
Teacher quality maximized
Reduction in special education referrals
Funding reallocated within a collaborative and unified
system
(Stangman et al., 2009; Levenson, 2011)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified
MTSS & UDL cont...
UDL  supports inclusion & meeting diverse needs
MTSS  supports addressing students needs
(intervention) & identifying progress through
collection of data (response)
Aligned IDEA & MTSS  - facilitate successful
outcomes through unified MTSS & UDL
(Kalberg et al., 2010; Rose, 2009; Sailor, 2009; VanDerHeyden &
Burns, 2010)
Conclusion
Common Core State Standards Initiative
Alignment of important components of IDEA &
ESEA with effective learning frameworks of MTSS &
UDL – can work within this initiative
Funding for ESEA needs to increase (CASE, 2011) =
greater success in alignment
An aligned IDEA & ESEA, within a unified MTSS &
UDL framework may reshape education in an
equitable way for all students.