5/17/05 -- U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings issued guidelines May 10 on the testing of students with disabilities under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).
The guidelines are a follow-up to Spellings’ announcement in April promising states additional alternatives and flexibility to implement NCLB.
“NSBA welcomes increased flexibility, but the Education Department needs to address a wider range of implementation issues immediately,” says NSBA Associate Executive Director Michael A. Resnick. “School districts are getting frustrated by the department’s slowness in addressing the issues surrounding the implementation of NCLB.”
Under existing rules, no more than 1 percent of all students being tested (those with the most significant cognitive disabilities) who take an alternative assessment can have their scores count for meeting a school or district’s adequate yearly progress (AYP) target. All other students with disabilities must take the same tests as their grade-level peers.
Last month, Spellings said that requirement would be modified to give some states more flexibility to allow the scores of up to 3 percent of students with disabilities who take alternative tests to count for AYP purposes.
But under the guidelines announced last week, the increased flexibility to administer alternate tests is only allowed on a short-term basis, and only states that meet specific criteria would be allowed to apply for it.
“Under the new flexibility option,” Spellings says, “eligible states may adjust their state-set progress goals to reflect the need for modified assessments.”
“Students with academic disabilities will be allowed to take tests that are specifically geared toward their abilities, as long as the state is working to best serve those students by providing rigorous research-based training for teachers, improving assessments, and organizing collaboration between special education and classroom teachers,” Spellings says.
According to the department, “the new guidelines outline the process for how eligible states can implement this new policy in the short term until the department issues final regulations on the policy.”
Under this short-term option, states that meet the eligibility guidelines can adjust their 2005-06 AYP goals for students with disabilities based on tests given to students in the 2004-05 school year. This option applies only to schools or districts that did not make AYP based solely on the scores of students within the disabilities subgroup.
“Eligible states that currently assess students based on modified achievement standards will be able to use those assessments for AYP calculations this year,” the department says. “Only states that intend to develop modified achievement standards and assessments are eligible for short-term flexibility.”
To be considered eligible to take advantage of this short-term option:
• states must have statewide participation rates for students with disabilities, for purposes of measuring AYP, of at least 95 percent;
• states have to provide appropriate accommodations to students with disabilities;
• states must make available alternate assessments in reading/language arts and mathematics for students with disabilities who are unable to participate in the regular assessments -- even with accommodations -- and must report the results from those alternate assessments; and
• a state’s subgroup size for students with disabilities must be equal to that of other student groups.
According to Resnick: “These guidelines will help clarify how the rules for modified assessments for children with disabilities will work, but regulations on this issue are still needed. Only some states are likely to qualify under the department’s eligibility criteria.”
“While the new guidelines address one of the many issues NSBA has raised with regard to the implementation of NCLB,” he says, “they also narrow the range of states and school districts that can take advantage of alternate assessments.”
Meanwhile, NSBA has had several meetings with Spellings and Assistant Secretary Raymond Simon and also with members of the House and Senate on NSBA’s proposals to improve NCLB.
NSBA’s bill would improve the method for determining AYP, strengthen the alignment between the required sanctions and the educational needs of individual students, allow the education secretary greater flexibility to approve effective and innovative state accountability systems, and address the lack of funding. Several bills have been introduced in the House and Senate that incorporate many of the provisions in NSBA’s proposed bill.