|
 Guidance
to States On How To Request an Exception to the 1% NCLB/AYP Rule
for Students with Disabilities
by Raymond Simon, Assistant U.S. Secretary for Elementary
and Secondary Education, March 2, 2004
For more articles like this
visit
https://www.bridges4kids.org.
Letter to Chief State School Officers Regarding Inclusion of
Students with Disabilities in State Accountability Systems
March 2, 2004
Dear Chief State
School Officers:
One of the
most difficult issues facing States and school districts today
is the inclusion of students with disabilities in their State
assessment and accountability systems. The President and I
strongly believe that no child should be left behind, including
children with disabilities. As a result, I continue to support
vigorously the Title I requirements that all students, including
students with disabilities, be held to the same challenging
content and achievement standards.
More so than most
other students, students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities face unique challenges in meeting grade-level
expectations. Accordingly, we recently finalized a regulation
that allows States, in meeting the Title I requirements, to use
alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards
for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. A
copy of this regulation is available on the Department's
Internet website at:
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2003-4/120903a.html.
When this
regulation was issued in final form, we promised to provide
additional guidance to States about how they might seek an
exception to one aspect of this regulation - the limit on the
number of proficient scores that may be included in AYP
decisions. We recognize that there may be valid reasons why a
1.0 percent cap is not sufficient for a State or district.
Accordingly, a State may apply to the Secretary for exceptions
in order to exceed slightly the 1.0 percent cap. For States
wishing to seek an exception, we offer the following to
facilitate this process.
The State should
contact Kerri Briggs (kerri.briggs@ed.gov
202-401-0113), in my office, no later than three months
prior to the date by which schools will be notified about
identification for improvement, if an exception is necessary for
AYP decisions based on 2003-2004 assessment data. We will
arrange conversations with the State staff to discuss the
details and get a better understanding of any unique
circumstances. During this process, the State should provide the
following information:
-
Data showing
the incidence rate of students with the most significant
cognitive disabilities. Suggested data include data on how
students with the most significant cognitive disabilities
are defined (such as the number of students who are within
one or more categories of disability, and whose cognitive
impairments prevent them from attaining grade-level
achievement standards), confirmatory data demonstrating that
the State has programs attracting students with the most
significant cognitive disabilities, a list of local
educational agencies (LEA) by total population tested if the
State's rationale for an exception is small district size,
or information indicating that students' participation in
such assessments is made on a case-by-case basis.
-
Information
showing how the State has implemented alternate achievement
standards (summary of §200.6(a)(2)(iii)):
-
Guidelines
for individualized education program (IEP) teams to
determine when a child's significant cognitive
disability justifies the alternate assessment based on
alternate achievement standards.
-
Information
about how parents are informed that their child will be
assessed based on alternate achievement standards,
including information about the implications of
participation in the alternate assessment if the State
has identified consequences for students based on
assessment results (e.g., if the State requires a
student to pass an assessment based on grade level
achievement standards to graduate).
-
Documentation of the number and percent of students
taking an alternate assessment based on alternate
achievement standards, alternate assessments based on
grade level achievement standards, and regular
assessments (with or without accommodations).
-
Documentation that describes how students with the most
significant cognitive disabilities are included in the
general curriculum and that shows how alternate
assessments are aligned with that curriculum.
-
Documentation of efforts taken by the State to develop,
disseminate information on, and promote the use of
appropriate accommodations.
-
Documentation of efforts (such as professional
development or guidance documents) taken to ensure
teachers and other staff know how to administer
assessments, including appropriate use of
accommodations.
If necessary, we
will work with an outside team of peer reviewers to examine the
evidence provided by the State and to give us a recommendation.
We will review the State's information provided and work with
the State to come to an appropriate resolution.
We expect that it
will be necessary to grant exceptions only for small increments
above the 1.0 percent cap and that we will grant such exceptions
only for a specified period of time, depending on the
circumstances that warrant the exception.
I strongly
encourage States to establish a system that is equally rigorous
for LEAs that request an exception to the 1.0 percent cap. An
LEA may initiate an exception request or a State may initiate an
exception on behalf of an LEA; in either case, the LEA should
provide evidence that explains why more than 1.0 percent of all
students in the LEA's tested grades have the most significant
cognitive disabilities. Further, as States consider whether to
allow any exceptions, they should be mindful of how individual
LEA exceptions will affect the overall 1.0 percent cap that
applies at the State level. We will not grant an exception to a
State based on the State's liberal granting of exceptions to
LEAs.
If you have
additional questions, please contact me. I am exceedingly
grateful for the cooperation you and your staff have
demonstrated throughout this process. Together, we can work to
ensure that no child, including one with a disability, is left
behind.
Sincerely,
Raymond Simon
back to the top ~
back to Breaking News
~ back to
What's New
|
