Children & Youth Action Network
(CAN) Reports

		(CAN) Reports 15 February 2010 14 November 2008 15 February 2008 17 September 2007 28 June 2007 17 March 2007 6 December 2006 20 October 2006 14 August 2006 8 June 2006 30 March 2006 23 January 2006 11 October 2005 30 August 2005 10 August 2005 28 June 2005 10 June 2005 2 May 2005 14 March 2005 10 January 2005 3 December 2004 22 November 2004 22 October 2004 30 September 2004 29 July 2004 24 May 2004 31 March 2004 12 January 2004 29 December 2003 10 December 2003 7 November 2003 13 October 2003 16 September 2003 18 August 2003 2 July 2003 25 June 2003

Judy B. Engelhard, CAN Coordinator for the Division for Learning Disabilities, provides brief reports for TeachingLD.org so that visitors can keep informed about important developments in policies affecting students with learning disabilities and their teachers. TeachingLD.org is pleased to offer this page as a place for people concerned with learning disabilities to keep up to date.

23 January 2006

REPORT ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF NCLD & IDEA

On December 22, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) released The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Interactions with Selected Provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA). The report details assessment and accountability requirements included in IDEA and NCLB, including one percent and two percent flexibility in testing students with disabilities and school personnel requirements. The report provides information on non-regulatory guidance issued by the Department of Education on topics such as public school choice and supplemental educational services, and provides a summary of selected issues and litigation. CEC has posted the full report here.

DLD AND CEC SEEK COMMENTS ON PROPOSED REGULATIONS FOR MODIFIED ASSESSMENTS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

DLD and CEC will be commenting on the proposed regulations published December 15, 2005 by the U.S. Department of Education in the Federal Register. The proposed regulations amend Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) by providing states with more flexibility regarding the assessment of students with disabilities by allowing another 2% of students with disabilities to participate in modified assessments based on modified achievement standards. Many students with specific learning disabilities may be included in these assessments so we would like to hear your views. The 75 day public comment period ends on February 28, 2006. Please send your 2 percent proposed regulation comments to CEC at pubpol@cec.sped.org and to DLD at CAN@TeachingLD.org.

You may also want to send your comments on the proposed regulations via email to TitleIrulemaking@ed.gov. Be sure to include "proposed 2 percent rule" in the subject line of your message. To see Secretary Spellings' press release and other information on the 2 percent proposed regulations, go to http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2005/12/12142005a.html.

DLD SUPPORTS JOINT STATEMENT: NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT

DLD joined other organizations in support of the joint statement of recommendations for improving the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. NCLB is slated for reauthorization in 2007. The organizations will work together to determine what specific changes or adjustments to NCLB are needed to make the law better and to improve implementation.

Joint Organizational Statement on No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act
List of signers updated in October 2005

The undersigned education, civil rights, children's, disability, and citizens' organizations are committed to the No Child Left Behind Act's objectives of strong academic achievement for all children and closing the achievement gap. We believe that the federal government has a critical role to play in attaining these goals. We endorse the use of an accountability system that helps ensure all children, including children of color, from low-income families, with disabilities, and of limited English proficiency, are prepared to be successful, participating members of our democracy.

While we all have different positions on various aspects of the law, based on concerns raised during the implementation of NCLB, we believe the following significant, constructive corrections are among those necessary to make the Act fair and effective. Among these concerns are: over-emphasizing standardized testing, narrowing curriculum and instruction to focus on test preparation rather than richer academic learning; over-identifying schools in need of improvement; using sanctions that do not help improve schools; inappropriately excluding low-scoring children in order to boost test results; and inadequate funding. Overall, the law's emphasis needs to shift from applying sanctions for failing to raise test scores to holding states and localities accountable for making the systemic changes that improve student achievement.

Recommended Changes in NCLB

Progress Measurement

1. Replace the law's arbitrary proficiency targets with ambitious achievement targets based on rates of success actually achieved by the most effective public schools.
2. Allow states to measure progress by using students' growth in achievement as well as their performance in relation to pre-determined levels of academic proficiency.
3. Ensure that states and school districts regularly report to the government and the public their progress in implementing systemic changes to enhance educator, family, and community capacity to improve student learning.
4. Provide a comprehensive picture of students' and schools' performance by moving from an overwhelming reliance on standardized tests to using multiple indicators of student achievement in addition to these tests.
5. Fund research and development of more effective accountability systems that better meet the goal of high academic achievement for all children

Assessments

6. Help states develop assessment systems that include district and school-based measures in order to provide better, more timely information about student learning.
7. Strengthen enforcement of NCLB provisions requiring that assessments must:
   • Be aligned with state content and achievement standards;
   • Be used for purposes for which they are valid and reliable;
   • Be consistent with nationally recognized professional and technical standards;
   • Be of adequate technical quality for each purpose required under the Act;
   • Provide multiple, up-to-date measures of student performance including measures that assess higher order thinking skills and understanding; and
   • Provide useful diagnostic information to improve teaching and learning.
8. Decrease the testing burden on states, schools and districts by allowing states to assess students annually in selected grades in elementary, middle schools, and high schools.

Building Capacity

9. Ensure changes in teacher and administrator preparation and continuing professional development that research evidence and experience indicate improve educational quality and student achievement.
10. Enhance state and local capacity to effectively implement the comprehensive changes required to increase the knowledge and skills of administrators, teachers, families, and communities to support high student achievement.

Sanctions

11. Ensure that improvement plans are allowed sufficient time to take hold before applying sanctions; sanctions should not be applied if they undermine existing effective reform efforts.
12. Replace sanctions that do not have a consistent record of success with interventions that enable schools to make changes that result in improved student achievement.

Funding

13. Raise authorized levels of NCLB funding to cover a substantial percentage of the costs that states and districts will incur to carry out these recommendations, and fully fund the law at those levels without reducing expenditures for other education programs.
14. Fully fund Title I to ensure that 100 percent of eligible children are served.

We, the undersigned, will work for the adoption of these recommendations as central structural changes needed to NCLB at the same time that we advance our individual organization's proposals.

1. Advancement Project
2. American Association of School Administrators
3. American Association of School Librarians (AASL), a division of the American Library Association (ALA)
4. American Association of University Women
5. American Dance Therapy Association
6. American Federation of School Administrators (AFSA)
7. Annenberg Institute for School Reform
8. Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund
9. ASPIRA
10. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
11. Association of School Business Officials International (ASBO)
12. Campaign for Fiscal Equity/ACCESS
13. Center for Expansion of Language and Thinking
14. Children's Defense Fund
15. Citizens for Effective Schools
16. Coalition of Essential Schools
17. Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism
18. Communities for Quality Education
19. Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders
20. Council for Exceptional Children
21. Cross City Campaign for Urban School Reform
22. Division for Learning Disabilities of the Council for Exceptional Children (DLD/CEC)
23. FairTest: The National Center for Fair & Open Testing
24. Forum for Education and Democracy
25. General Board of Church and Society, The United Methodist Church
26. Hmong National Development
27. International Reading Association
28. International Technology Education Association
29. Learning Disabilities Association of America
30. League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)
31. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
32. NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund (LDF)
33. National Association for Bilingual Education (NABE)
34. National Association for the Education and Advancement of Cambodian, Laotian and Vietnamese Americans (NAFEA)
35. National Alliance of Black School Educators
36. National Association of School Psychologists
37. National Association of Social Workers
38. National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development
39. National Council for the Social Studies
40. National Council of Churches
41. National Council of Jewish Women
42. National Council of Teachers of English
43. National Down Syndrome Congress
44. National Education Association
45. National Indian Education Association
46. National Indian School Board Association
47. National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (NAKASEC)
48. National Rural Education Association
49. National School Boards Association
50. National Urban League
51. Native Hawaiian Education Association
52. People for the American Way
53. Presbyterian Church (USA)
54. Rural School and Community Trust
55. Service Employees International Union
56. School Social Work Association of America
57. Social Action Committee of the Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations
58. Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC)
59. Stand for Children
60. United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries
61. Women's Division of the General Board of Global Ministries, The United Methodist Church
62. Women of Reform Judaism