Special education reform: a study in contrasts - Federal Dateline - Brief Article

School Administrator, June, 2002 by Bruce Hunter

During the next 12 to 15 months, Congress, the Bush administration, disability advocates and education groups will debate federal policy on special education.

The Bush administration framed the debate earlier this year when Robert Pasternack, assistant secretary for special education and rehabilitative services in the U.S. Department of Education, stated that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act needs a major overhaul. AASA has weighed in with a set of proposals for changing parts of IDEA that the association's Committee on Federal Policy and Legislation developed in January and February as reactions to current policy that rises to the superintendent's desk for action.

Predictably, AASA's major concern deals with funding the federal share of IDEA. We have had a run of successes that have pleasantly surprised us and absolutely confounded the administration and those in Congress who oppose financing the federal share of IDEA at 40 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure, slightly more than $7,000 last year.

Our proposal, which was adopted by a coalition of groups, suggests Washington reach the 40 percent mark by increasing IDEA funding by $2.5 billion a year for six years. At this time, IDEA is funded over 10 years in the budget reported by the House Budget Committee and over six years in the plan developed by the Senate Budget Committee.

Both budget resolutions make it possible for IDEA spending to be moved from the discretionary side of the federal budget to the mandatory side without being subject to a point of order that the move was not paid for in the budget resolution. Avoiding the point of order is important because if the costs were not anticipated, the opponents of mandatory IDEA funding can call the spending unplanned and fiscally unsound.

A Disciplined Message

This is the single best lobbying school administrators ever have done. It even makes our efforts against vouchers pale in comparison. We won the first round convincingly in a 10-round fight because everyone has been heard. The Bush administration now will weigh in on the other side and try to win the next round on the House and Senate floors.

This will be a battle royal because the administration enjoys massive public support and members of Congress may quail in the face of fierce opposition. However, it is an election year and Congress listens closely to folks at home, including public school leaders, during such times.

Funding IDEA at 40 percent of perpupil expenditures is a 10-round contest that can be won this year but only with great message discipline and persistence. Our message must be direct: Give us a clear promise for funding the federal share of special education costs by making funding mandatory.

We must deliver this message repeatedly with passion and coherence. This is a little like the principle of advertising--the message has to be delivered 10 or 12 times before it really breaks through the clutter.

Teachers Ignored

In stark contrast to the noise we have made about funding, the concerns of rank-and-file teachers and special education teachers are going unheard. The passion and anger about special education I hear when I talk to teachers is entirely missing in the Washington debates. Instead I hear the predictable and politically correct utterances that the federal law is working satisfactorily and that we should all just hold hands and sing "Kumbaya."

Maybe I'm talking to the wrong folks, but the teachers I hear from are mighty angry with the way IDEA is working for children with profound behavioral problems. While some disability advocacy groups seem highly content with the decided tilt toward parents' issues and litigation in IDEA's procedural safeguards, especially in the largest cities, I hear from those in classrooms that the law allows parents to abuse teachers with impunity. These parents, with their savvy lawyers, cow school districts into accepting pupil placements and expensive services that ignore quality programs available to them in schools and cost the districts so much that those students not served by IDEA suffer by comparison.

Teachers tell me that IDEA's legal procedures have put them at the mercy of parents who demean their professional skill and knowledge by ignoring the capacity of public school services when they win private placements for their children.

Because I represent the wishes of district administrators, the legitimate concerns of these teachers are not in my lobbying portfolio. But the professional groups in Washington to which these folks belong ought to be giving voice to their enormous frustration. Assistant Secretary Pasternack seems to be tapping that vein of frustration. I hope he continues because the folks on the firing line deserve to be heard.

If the voice of teachers is heard, then we can skip the "Kumbaya" routine. Rather we will have a tough but honest discussion about making the whole system work for all kids, and we will get some of the money we need to make that happen.