Federal Update:
IDEA, Title III, R&S, Bullying
Sasha Pudelski
February 18, 2012
National Conference on Education
Overview of Presentation
ESEA
IDEA
Reauthorization Reauthorization
Issues
Issues
Foster Care
Assessments
Title III
Bullying
Maintenance of Effort
Transition
RTI
Murphy & Weast
Seclusion & Restraint
Thompson
Foster Care Language in Senate ESEA
• Schools pay for transportation to/from school for all
children in foster care
– Distance or placement location is not a factor. You could be
transporting them out of state
• Foster Care students have a right to immediate
enrollment
– Even adjudicated delinquents
• Requirement to have a foster care liaison
– No money for a liaison
• Disaggregation requirement for student achievement
– In addition to the normal categories (race, income,
disability, etc.) you must also track student achievement by
foster care status
Assessments
• Senate
– Eliminates 2% assessment option
– Maintains cap for 1% test
• House
– Expands 1% assessment eligibility
– Silent on 2% assessment
Title III: English Language Learners
• Senate bill
– Uniform definition of ELL
• House bill
– Collapses funding for Title III into Title I
• Neither bill
– Creates “Total English Language” subgroup
– Allows school districts to determine when
accountability testing should be given to ELL students
– Increases exemption from testing for ELL students
Bullying
• Original Senate bullying legislation would:
–
–
–
–
–
Require schools to report all bullying and cyber-bullying incidents
Require that bullying data be disaggregated
Very broad definition of bullying and cyber-bullying
District must have person who handles bullying complaints
Designates timeline for investigating and resolving bullying complaints
• Negotiated Senate version:
– Creates federal bullying definition, almost identical to sexual
harassment definition
– This definition must prohibit bullying on basis of sexual orientation
• No bullying language as part of House ESEA bill
• 47 states have their own bullying laws, definitions and
requirements. Feds need to butt out!
Litigation related to
Student Online Speech
• In January, SCOTUS declined to hear cases
involving student online speech
• “At the moment, school officials are stuck
between a rock and a hard place. They are
responsible for protecting students and teachers
from online harassment, but in doing so, they
might trigger a lawsuit from a student claiming
that his or her First Amendment rights have been
violated. School officials cannot afford to wait any
longer for a definitive answer.“ (AASA Amicus
Brief, U.S. Supreme Court)
Seclusion and Restraint
•
•
•
•
Prohibited for special-ed and gen-ed students
Prohibited from being including in IEP
Mandates huge data reporting and collection
Only can be used if child is at risk of causing
“serious bodily injury”
• FAPE denied if used inappropriately
• Not yet in either Senate or House ESEA bill,
but advocates want to add it to both
Maintenance of Effort (IDEA)
• IDEA requires 100% MOE
• States can seek a waiver to reduce state effort
for IDEA because of “exceptional or
uncontrollable circumstances such as a natural
disaster or a precipitous and unforeseen
decline in State financial resources”
• LEA does not have this option
• AASA pushing for language to give LEAs same
waiver option
Transition
• New bill focusing on improving transition for SWD
will be introduced this summer by Sen. Harkin
• This bill will not amend IDEA
• AASA supports bill language that would
– Allow VR dollars geared towards on-the-job-training
to be used while students are in school in conjunction
with transition IEP
– Create and fund state level positions that coordinate
special-education, VR and CTE options and services
– Set-aside 10% of VR funding for transition services
– Change VR Priority list to put 18-26 year olds at the
top
Response-to-Intervention (RTI)
• Special-ed is defined as providing “specifically
designed instruction”
• Child-find obligation conflicts with RTI process
• Both “special-ed” and “child find” need new
definitions, otherwise schools risk litigation
• With IDEA re-authorization unlikely in next
few years, protect your district by
– Notifying parents immediately about RTI process
– Notifying parents about legal rights under IDEA
IDEA Re-Authorization issues
resulting from SCOTUS decisions
• Bill to overturn Arlington Central School
District v. Murphy
– IDEA Fairness Restoration Act
– This bill would override Murphy and enable
parents to recover their expert witness fees
• Bill to overturn Schaffer v. Weast
– Weast placed burden of proof on parents
– No bill introduced yet, expected soon
Other Cases of Note
• Thompson v. Board of the Special School
District (U.S. Ct. Appeals - 8th Circuit)
– Does the parent lose the right to sue the district if
the student is no longer enrolled in the district?
– 8th circuit says yes
– Federal district courts in Michigan, California and
Pennsylvania say no
– This issue will be heavily debated in IDEA ReAuthorization
Have you visited AASA’s
newest website yet?
www.aasaconnect.com
AASA Connect provides resources
specific to superintendents that are
not available anywhere else online
Features of aasaconnect.com
• Opportunities to read school district success stories
contributed by AASA Members and share your own
with superintendents across the country
• A library of articles on issues such as
superintendent contracts and evaluations and
improving professional development for teachers
• Tools for building successful school PR machine
• The latest research from DC think-tanks
• Read and respond to Dan Domenech’s latest blog
entries and columns
Questions?
• Sasha Pudelski, spudelski@aasa.org
• Noelle Ellerson, nellerson@aasa.org
• Bruce Hunter, bhunter@aasa.org