Catching Up

Well, ELA was awesome, but I was mostly MIA on the Net. So, it's time to catch up a little. 

First, more stupid zero-tolerance fallout. A girl brought empty gun shells to show science teacher ... and suspended. This is not as bad as some others, but these kind of stories continue weekly these days. At some point the embarrassment factor must kick in. h/t S.M.

Great report from Fordham law on state data system privacy elements and the Washington Post coverage (EdWeek too). I can't disagree with the authors legally, but I do think their natural inclination to protect, protect, protect is the wrong inclination and is going to slow down important research that could improve schools. The solution here is just to let public universities store the data warehouses. We are public institutions within the public trust, but it connects data and researchers more closely. I would like to see more universities getting into this business. 

Bryan Jason Ford (@BryanJasonFord) on the implications of the Supreme Court's denial of cert. in Stancourt v. Worthington City Sch. Dist.. This is pretty good if you are a special ed. person or interested in the Supreme Court approval process. 

Special Ed. Teacher Instruction in Law

The big news making rounds today is the new GAO report on teacher education as related to special education. In it, the GAO finds that most schools of education require at least one course related to students with disabilities and only 20 percent offer instruction related to ELL students. One of the elements mentioned as a component of the special education training are the federal laws. 

Well, from my experience, this training is woefully lacking in quality. Every time I have undergrads or teach grad. level courses (at multiple institutions now) the story is the same - students don't even know the basics of special education law. Simple stuff like FAPE is a new concept to them. 

So, while schools of ed. may be devoting courses to special education, those courses are not conveying even a basic level of legal knowledge. I think there are probably several reasons for this, but chief among them are that people with no legal training are teaching these courses. As such, they simply require students to read a chapter on the legal basics and leave it at that - and that legal information is not soaking in. 

Thus, this is yet another reason to support the argument for a real law course in initial teacher preparation. Special education, ELL, and other neglected categories are not neglected in real ed. law courses, even at the undergraduate level. 

More Data Needed: State Special Education Due Process Systems

The latest 50 state (even then it was only 44 state) data on special education due process systems is from 2001.

Specifically, I wanted to know the number of states running two-tier due process systems (and maybe even make a pretty map for the blog). But, no data. In 2001 it was in the teens, but dropping. Where is it now? I'm not sure anyone knows.

Eileen Ahearn, who has done fabulous work in the past, did the 2001 study in which she sent a survey out to the 50 state directors of special education. That report was under the auspices of Project Forum, in conjunction with NASDSE, who I am sure would love to partner to do the study again if anyone was interested. I'd even offer to provide assistance because I would really like more data on these systems. 

ELA's Perspective

This is encouraging from ELA.

Administrator, Attorney and Professor perspective on Forest Grove.

Ditto for Safford v. Redding.

Learning About Roberts and Alito: Forest Grove School District v. T.A.

The Supreme Court released Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. T. A. today and in it found for the parents that their private school tuition should be reimbursed by the public school, even though the public school never made an attempt to provide FAPE in the first place. I think this is really the first education case in which we are feeling the full effects of Justices Roberts and Alito and, in particular, how those two justices are different than Justices Scalia and Thomas. Let me explain ...

 

The case concerned a high school student that was struggling. After his freshmen year the student was evaluated by the public school and the school concluded he did not have a disability. The academic results did not improve and, in the student's junior year, the parents became concerned and consulted private specialists to determine the cause of the academic struggles. The private evaluator diagnosed the student with ADHD and learning disabilities and recommended a private, residential, special education placement. The parents then enrolled him in a private academy. A few days later they informed the school and, after an evaluation, the school again found the student ineligible. The student was left in the private school for his senior year and the parents sought reimbursement for all those private school costs.

 

So, this is sort of a technical case, but I'll try to boil it down for us. This case basically came down to (1) statutory interpretation and (2) gut feeling on the purpose of IDEA and the effects of this policy.

 

First, statutorily this is a close call as IDEA does not really say what to do in instances where there simply was no FAPE provision at all. IDEA contemplates and instructs when a school tries and fails to provide FAPE, but not when a school evaluates that no FAPE is necessary in the first place, as it does in this case. So, if you want to get technical (and I have a variety of readers so I know some of you do), then the statutory provisions to consider in depth come from Section 1412(a)(10)(c). In particular read 1412(a)(10)(C)(i) against 1412(a)(10)(C)(ii). If you don't want to get so into the legalese, they generally say that publics should not have to pay for private school education if they provided FAPE, that is unless later that FAPE is determined inadequate by the courts. Justice Souter in dissent (with Scalia and Thomas) makes a good argument that the provision is pretty clear that first you have to try and fail with the public option - that trying the private option without getting a flat denial or inadequate FAPE does not warrant reimbursement. In this case, where they unilaterally placed in the junior year without first trying the public, were we to merely consider statutory interpretation it's hard to see how reimbursement is permitted under the language of IDEA. Of course, in these cases we usually don't merely consider the language by itself, and that is how Roberts and Alito are different than Scalia and Thomas.

 

Now, if you are to consider the practical effects of all this stuff and the policy effect it will have on children with disabilities, one is much more likely to find for the parents. Really, even though this is an important case in special education law, this is not life and death, especially in the Court's eyes who regularly deal with life and death. In all of the cases this ruling might apply to, the student is going to be a borderline special education student where he or she will be receiving some education in the regular education setting anyway. Really, it is only in very close calls that this case will even matter all that much. When you have (1) a close practical case like this, (2) a close statutory case like this and (3) there are feasible legal and policy interpretations on either side, Roberts and Alito came down on the side of sympathy to the law's original purpose and, frankly, sympathy to the plight of special education students and their parents. Stevens, writing for the majority in which Roberts and Alito joined, almost expressly states as much when he talks about the "remedial purpose of IDEA."

 

In the ability to consider a sympathetic position both to Congress and to plaintiffs we see a difference emerging between Roberts and Alito on one hand and Scalia and Thomas on the other. Scalia and Thomas would sentence themselves to death if that is what the language said in their mind, even in a close and ethically challenging case. They are proud of the fact that courts should not involve themselves in issues of policy or sympathy. Roberts and Alito take a somewhat more flexible approach in that when the language is plain it must be followed, but when it is not other considerations are warranted. Either result here could have been good or bad practically. A ruling for the school would embolden schools to flatly deny FAPE in the first place while a ruling for parents would, and will, encourage them to seek more costly unilateral placements that taxpayers will eventually have to fund. Considering the purpose of IDEA, the risk should be born by the taxpayers. And, frankly, I think this development in Robert's and Alito's judicial temperment is a good development for education generally and for students in particular (as long as you are a sympathitic student ... a.k.a. not Joseph Frederick). 

RTI and Special Education Enrollment Declines

I'm teaching a special education class at the moment and I was forced to reevaluate a long held belief. You see, since IDEA was first passed as EAHCA in 1975, there has been a steady increase in special education enrollments nationally. At least, that was what I told my students because last time I checked, that hadn't changed. Well, I checked again after a discussion about RTI implementation in Kentucky and sure enough, at least in Kentucky, we have for the first time seen a decline. Here is the data and here is a chart:

Okay, a few things to note. I put in the trendline so that you can see the trend is still very much in the positive direction since 1992. Second, there was a negligible decline in the 07 numbers, but a fairly substantial decline in the 08 numbers (so it will be interesting what 09 reveals). Third, this is not statistically correlated yet to RTI implementation, so there might be some other unexplained factor that is accounting for the drop. For instance maybe the economy is playing a role, maybe we did just finally hit a saturation point - there may be lots of non-RTI explanations.

But, my hunch is RTI. I can't speak to other states because I have been in Kentucky the last few years, but Kentucky has been very serious about RTI implementation and most schools across the Commonwealth are firmly on board from what I have seen. RTI has accounted for drops before in district numbers, but at least for me this is the first statewide drop I have seen. I checked a couple other states and there are some mixed data. Oregon and Illinois are still going up. Kansas seems to have leveled off. Maine has seen a decrease, as has Texas. Part of this, though, may be a function of when the latest data is available.

Anyway, someone needs to get out there and look at all the state's data and compare that to RTI implementation. These numbers will eventually aggregate into national numbers and we'll have a little better national picture, but what we really need to be able to statistically verify is whether and how much effect RTI is having on special education enrollments at the local, state and national levels. On top of that, we really need a TON of data on those students that are being directed away from special education because of RTI. Are they achieving? What is the recurrence rate? And, a ton more questions. And, we need all this by the next round of IDEA reauthorization.

Harrison Williams' Bill

Our own little Charlie Wilson ... sort of. Harrison (Pete) Williams was a Senator from New Jersey. He is important to us because he was the Senator that proposed the core provisions of EAHCA, what is today IDEA, based off the PARC and Mills cases which granted equal educational access to children with disabilities. 

A few years later, just as his law was starting to positively affect the lives of millions of disabled students, he was caught taking bribes in an FBI sting operation called ABSCAM (the same sting operation John Murtha was involved in). He agreed to take stock in a titanium mining business in return for giving the business special treatment by the government. He was convicted and served several years in jail.   

I guess you take your heroes where you can find them. 

Restraint and Seclusion. Are we really trained for this?

I have not posted to this blog in awhile--serving the research/writing/grading-papers masters--but now I take the opportunity of Justin's vacation to renew my contributions (albeit a couple of days late--my apologies, Justin). I will start with an alarming story that raises many difficult issues. I'm always cautious about relying on news reports, so I take these with an appropriate dose of skepticism, but several national news sources (of all political stripes) have reported in the last few days on a recent Government Accountability Office study assessing the use of restraint and seclusion to control the behavior of special education students. According to the reports, in just California and Texas (two of the five in the nation that require educational institutions to report their use of restraint and seclusion), one or the other technique was used more than 33,000 times in one school year, ostensibly to keep certain potentially dangerous special education students from hurting themselves or others.

Except that, in some cases (and even one is too many, in my opinion), the special education students apparently end up being hurt (or even killed) by the techniques themselves. For instance, a little girl in Wisconsin (not one of the states in the GAO report) was recently allegedly suffocated when a much larger adult attempted to restrain her by pinning her down. Her potentially dangerous activities? According to NPR, "fidgeting and blowing bubbles in her milk." Now, I'm sure that description is pretty scaled down, and I have no doubt that the adult in question perceived a risk subjectively, but it seems obvious to me that even special education teachers are not often fully trained in the use of such techniques. Education schools do not specialize in this sort of training--police academies do. And even if traditionally certified special education teachers typically have some relevant training (and I doubt very much that any such training is ample), we cannot forget the equally alarming presence of many uncertified--and sometimes completely untrained--teachers in special education assignments. Is it a good idea to allow adults to use these techniques without significant training?

Of course, the schools (and the teachers) are placed into an untenable position here. On one hand, the teacher may perceive that a manifestation of the student's disability may cause harm to the student or to others. In many cases, the teacher is the first and only line of defense here, so she must do something. Indeed, if she fails to act, and someone is hurt, the school may be exposed to liability for negligent supervision. On the other hand, schools would also seem to expose themselves to significant liability by empowering teachers with the authority and the discretion to use techniques that could endanger the one to whom they are applied--especially in the absence of ample training. We all know that schools and school districts are very, very risk averse, sometimes even to the detriment of the learning process. What, then, explains the apparent widespread use of these techniques? Mere expedience? Lack of options?  Whatever the reason, if I were an administrator in a school where these techniques were on the table, I would make sure to make the proper application of such techniques my very highest professional development priority.

Supreme Court Previews at the School Law Blog

Mark Walsh has done a superb job as always in previewing the upcoming Supreme Court cases related to education and instead of duplicating the effort, I will just point you over there. Mark usually attends the oral arguments as well, so be sure to watch for that also. 

Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. T.A.

Safford U. Sch. Dist. v. Redding

Horne v. Flores

We are lucky to have a great resource like Mark in our field and since he is funded under a business structure instead of a university structure, be sure to patronize him plenty to make sure his employer is aware of his value.

Palin to Talk Policy on Special Needs Issues

Anyone that has been following the blog at all the past couple months will know that Jim Gerl, of the Special Education Law Blog, and I have had a bit of personal quest to get something out of the candidates on special education policy (Jim more so than me - and it was his idea to start). So far ... not much luck.

But, alas, our long quest may be about to come to an end. Sarah Palin is expected to give a policy speech on special needs children tomorrow. In fact, it will be her first and only (to date) policy speech whatsoever. Who knew special education issues carried such import!

Of course, I am going to be watching this closely. I have been critical (as have others) of Gov. Palin and Sen. McCain for using a child's disability as a political ploy. So, I have high expectations for this policy address. Since they are billing it as a policy address, I am expecting real policies. Real ideas. Real improvements. Just something real, period. Here's hoping Jim and I will finally be able to rest easy tomorrow night knowing that at least someone has decided to talk seriously about this issue.

Update: Well, just watched the speech and I am going to give it a B. First, only MSNBC (surprise) carried the whole speech. Even Fox News cut her off and CNN didn't even carry it to begin with. She gave the speech in a small auditorium, but the sounds of children were clearly evident, which I think is nice.

Here are some policy ideas: The big idea was choice (vouchers, I assume) for special needs parents. Parents could be given a voucher and then choose where to spend that voucher, either public or private. Another idea was to strengthen NIH for "cures." Also, she advocated for "administrative clarification" and finally she said that IDEA will be fully funded under a McCain-Palin administration.

I am not going to evaluate the policy proposals, but clearly the choice/voucher idea makes little sense to me. Of course, she didn't say how it would actually work, so it is hard to judge. The fully funding proposal certainly is a statement that will resonate with special education advocates and, if it is implemented, would actually help the states.

But, besides the policy proposals, which probably deserve about a C-, she deserves some credit for being empathitic. I think there is genuine identification with special needs parents and recognition of some of the critical issues. She said that schools are doing the best they can, but that parents know that it is just not good enough for their kids. And, I think that shows at least some degree of a higher level of policy critique. This is not a issue where there is a clear bad guy and she seems to recognize that. 

Additionally, I am going to give her a lot of credit for doing it. Yes, there was some pressure as the major media outlets criticized the Republican ticket for a lack of specifics and using Trig Palin as a political ploy, but less than two weeks out there are a lot of bigger issues that can score more political points. She has chosen to use one of the few remaining days in this election to devote to special needs issues. Let's not kid ourselves, Sarah Palin's time in the spotlight is about over. The chances of McCain winning this election are about nill. So, I think there is at least some degree of honor in Gov. Palin's choice to highlight special education issues with her dwindling campaign megaphone.

So, a B. The policy proposals were not great, but the speech serves to highlight special education at least to some degree ... and I think that benefits special education and special needs students.

Friday Snippets: 10/17/08: No Tattoos!

Lots of stuff this week, so let's get started:

The administrator retirement caps issue in New Jersey hits formal hearings. If I were school administrators, I would watch this closely as this could be a "coming soon to a state near you" kind of issue.

Painful layoffs in Dallas. They are also fighting over evolution in Texas ... still. And worried about finding ways to teach the Bible. Ahh, Texas, it's like a whole 'nother country.

There is a bi-lingual bill on the Oregon ballot this time that would limit bi-lingual instruction to 2 years. After that English only.

Some pushback on attendance, special education and NCLB passage rates. This was a nice story and it was on page A1 of the Washington Post ... Kudos, folks.

A 45 year school desegregation case in Macon, GA finally comes to a close.  They won't know what to do without it.

Another defamation case ... this time against a teacher union's political activities in getting a state senator with ethical issues kicked out.

The voucher fight in Utah continues (you can pretty much book a snippet about this every week)... please, someone write a book about this.

New Hampshire school funding suit is dismissed by their Supreme Court as moot.

And h/t Scott McLeod: No teacher tattoos in Joplin, MO.

Around the Ed. Law Blogosphere:

Jim Gerl finally gets something out of the candidates ... although not much.
 
Mark Walsh has his story on the AEI/Fordham legal history of education forum. It sounds really cool and I wish I could have gone. They said they would put the video up, but I have not seen it yet. If I do, I will post it.

Mark has a nice detailed post on the immunity issue in front of the Court now.

Title IX blog has a concerning Georgia teacher harassment case.

Couldn't agree more with Charles Fox on the political symbol that is Trig Palin.

The Connecticut Ed. Law Blog has a good point that the ADA amendments may require changes to 504 forms as well.

Stanley Fish, Sherman Dorn, Andrew Rotherham, & Joanne Jacobs weigh in on the NY political speech controversy. If that case was all about making a widely distributed political statement ... mission accomplished.

For your Friday Fun: Last weekend I made applebutter (and like I said last week, I burned my hand). Anyway lots of people in my office this week wanted to know about how you made it, so here is a good video from Southern Illinois about our traditions and how we made it (we cooked ours in the kettle but started with whole apples instead of boiling down the day before). We made 150 quarts of applebutter last weekend and only I was injured ... so that's pretty good.

Photocredit: Mommylolly

Google Document Link:Friday Snippets: 10/17/08: No Tattoos!

Jim Gerl is Smiling

Watching the debate now and sort of following along with the liveblogs ... here is MSNBC on McCain's statements on Palin's Vice Presidential qualification that she is a special education expert:

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ON SPECIAL NEEDS
From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
McCain mentioned that Palin knows more about the issue of autism than nearly anyone. What evidence is there of that? 
 
Because Palin has a child with Down Syndrome, it can be safely assumed she feels a connection with parents of children with special needs.
 
But what does McCain-Palin specifically want to do about special education? Do they agree with IDEA? Do they want to expand rights for special-education students to private schools? Do they want to increase funding? Do they want more access, by way of funding, to special-ed advocates?
 
McCain also said they want to help find a cure. But how? 
 
The NIH budget has been slashed in the past eight years. Does McCain-Palin propose additional funding, particularly for autism or Down's research? 
 
We don't know. Nothing was or has been laid out.

Well, we new that already, didn't we. I am glad that the mainstream media are also aware of the candidate's lack of statements on special education. Maybe it won't be ignored in the next election.

Update: By the way, really hated that last question on education by Bob Schieffer. A question to the effect of "by all measures" our education system sucks. That's ridiculous and untruthful and I find it annoying that any question on education has to start with the premise that everything in education is bad. And, bonus annoyance, McCain again went with the line, "Education is the civil rights issue of our time" ... but you already knew that annoys me (2).

Update 2: Jeez, its so embarrassing. Using a child's genetic disorder, whatever genetic disorder he or she has obviously doesn't matter, as a political tool. Classy stuff.

Friday Snippets 10/10/08 - The Slow Down

As if teacher pension systems were not in enough trouble ... excess executive travel too? What about borrowing against the pension funds? There is just no way this doesn't get really, really ugly.

An example of how schools are contributing to the economic slowdown and how the economic slowdown can affect learning.

A "gay friendly" high school" in Chicago?

Polling school vouchers in North Carolina.

Schools are starting to figure out ways to deal with cell phones outside of a blanket ban.

Around the Ed. Law Blogosphere

Mark Walsh is keeping a close eye on the Supreme Court activities.

Wrightslaw has cases of deliberate indifference under Section 504 against the Hawaii BOE.

Jeffery Marcus at Developments in Special Education Law has an LRE case out of the 2nd Circuit.

Howard F. has a long-haired Kindergartener winning against a district.

Jim Gerl has some info on the National Council on Disability and more IEP Implementation.

Jennifer Marquis at the Connecticut Ed. Law Blog has a little on the new ADA.

And for your Friday Fun:

Had a weird urge to play Scrabble this week. This is where I did it and it was fun. I hadn't played in years.

Google Document Link: Friday Snippets 10/10/08 - The Slow Down

Friday Snippets - 10/3/08 - Officially a Resident of the Bluegrass

A quick edition this week. Spent today getting my Kentucky driver's license (which was surprisingly easy) and writing. Lots and lots of writing lately. I am realizing that more and more the professional career choice I made was ... author ... as I do more writing than just about anything else. 

First, an update on the ed. law academic job market. Well, its not looking good so far. I added another position to my list this week, but still it is a little bleak. The real missing players are the large state schools. Maybe they will be coming on the market soon. I will keep my eye on it, but so far the academic market just looks to be depressed generally this year. Speaking with my colleagues around the country, many of them reported to me that their universities are just not in a position to fill openings. Could have something to do with this. 

Someone needs to write a history of the Utah school vouchers fight. There is just too much juicy stuff not to. 

Making a "Blue" political statement in school? 

Been hearing way to much about sex ed and Alaska lately. 

Arizona considers affirmative action in law schools. 

Texas scientists say don't water down evolution in the state science curriculum. As I told my students last night ... the fight for Intelligent Design may be nearly over, but the fight against evolution generally is as strong as ever.

As Maryland shows, certification of all child care workers is on the horizon.

The nationwide crackdown on teacher sexual misconduct laws hits California this week.

Normally, I don't touch much higher ed., but the firings at the University of Iowa are really causing a stir.

Wiretapping buses? Maybe in Pennsylvania. Frankly, this Arkansas turning buses into virtual classrooms idea makes a LOT more sense. If we are going to be wiring up buses, let's do it with something that actually helps kids. 

    

Around the ed. law blogosphere:

Mark W. has the Supreme Court's education law cases roundup so far for this term. That kind of effort is very helpful to folks like me, so thanks Mark. Mitchell R. points us to where NSBA is tracking the possible ed. law supreme court cases here.   

Charles Fox has info on the ADA Amendments that became law this week. 

Howard F. has a school's "folding Jesus under" being approved.  

Erin B. has the Indiana transgender prom dress case surviving dismissal motions. This is an interesting little case and I am glad Erin is keeping an eye on it.    

Mark Ames at the Principal's Policy Blog has some good posts on recent federal activity worth reading.

Jim Gerl continues in his quest to get the candidates to answer special education questions. Me? I'm giving up. Its getting too close to the election for the candidates to be responding to inquiries like this now. My tact was to specifically target Obama and McCain education surrogates and try to get a response from them. But, even they are apparently instructed to stay away from special education law. This whole quest by Jim and I is sort of a sad story on the place of special education in this county. It takes one of the candidates to actually have a disabled child for anyone to actually pay attention to it and even then, they don't come up with policies or really even talking points. Very revealing (and disappointing).   

And finally, I recommend this post at my sister blog Dangerously Irrelevant on the legal accessibility of public information ... in an information age. 

For your Friday Fun: I registered to vote today, in some part aided by this video and the upcoming deadlines (not that I am easily convinced by celebrities).

Google Doc. Link: Friday Snippets - 10/3/08 

Friday Snippets: 9/26/2008 - Interesting Times

We are sure living in some interesting times, no? Everyday lately we get word of news that would have consumed months of newscycles. Last night hearing that Washington Mutual failed ... I didn't even blink - this is old hat by now. What are we going to do next year when all this settles down again? 

Boy, this Chicago thing just gets more interesting all the time. Now, Rep. Meeks, the boycott leader is threatening to have 6,000 protesters outside Wrigley Field for the first MLB playoff game. 

Georgia's school funding suits take an odd new turn. The Governor has asked for an inquiry of whether districts may use taxpayer dollars to fund these lawsuits. 

Why the N.J. Supreme Court should not be administering their school funding system. 

A challenge to the Texas minute of silence law. 

An Indiana AG candidate proposes including school related (but not employed) personnel (like bus drivers) in child protection laws. 

Can't be both a teacher and on the school board at the same time in Nevada. 

Illinois loses $221,000 in lost governmental contributions for every dropout. And they have a lot of them, according to a new study.

More evidence on why Supp. Educ. Services are not working like they thought they would. 

A FOIA case for a college administrator. 

Health Insurance costs are a problem in Arkansas. 

This was odd. Vetting, anyone? 

Around the Ed. Law Blogosphere:

A new ed. law blog to report this week: Developments in Special Education Law. H. Jeffrey Marcus has been posting for a while, but I just came across him now. He seems good at providing briefs on special education cases that come down. I added him to my blogroll. If you know of other ed. law blogs I don't have in my blogroll, please let me know. 

Wrightslaw has a N.C. special education student abuse case. 

Erin Buzuvis has a good post on ending the Title IX Blame Game. 

Mitchell R. points out a good resource for folks interested in getting a law school job: Legal Scholarship Blog. Here is a link from the Legal Scholarship Blog (RSS) of Law School Based Legal Conferences in Education Law. 

Mitchell also pointed out this revealing clip of Greta can Susteren talking about law school grading. 

Connecticut Ed. Law Blog has a case on cross-examining witnesses at sch. disciplinary hearings. 

Pamela Parker has guidelines on class sizes in Texas. 

The Integration Report is back after a couple month hiatus. 

Friday Fun: Apparently, its a bad idea to lie to David Letterman - especially when he finds out in the middle of the show. I love Keith Olberman's face during this whole thing. Like I said, we live in interesting times lately.  

Google Document Link: Friday Snippets: 9/26/2008 - Interesting Times.

Perhaps they will decide this time?

BoardBuzz has a good post on the potential case out of Oregon that may decide the Tom F. issue ... if the Supreme Court agrees to hear it. As BoardBuzz notes, that will depend on Justice Kennedy, who, at the last minute, recused himself in the Tom F. case leading to a one page per curium decision. The Court split on the issue of private school reimbursement of special education services without public school knowledge 4-4, so the lower court decision was affirmed by rule. Marcia Coyle had a nice summary of the case on the Newshour.

BoardBuzz applauds the district for sticking with the case all the way to the Supreme Court to try to provide resolution on this issue and I couldn't agree more. I have not read this specific case yet, so I won't give my take on it, but as a general principle I do think public schools need to be involved in placement decisions, even when public schools are being uncooperative or don't offer appropriate services. For better or worse, the public school is the guardian of the public dollars that will be used to fund private placements, so they need to be involved in those decisions. Rest assured, if the Supreme Court agrees to hear it, I will provide a more detailed take as the case approaches.

Friday Snippets: 09/19/08 - In the market for land?

A forgotten element in this financial crisis: teacher's pensions. 

Utah's turning its attention from vouchers to merit pay?

Big Ten network is now featuring professors on politics. (Suddenly I like conference networks a whole lot more ... bring on the SEC Network!)

Illegal immigrant in-state tuition lawsuit could spread beyond California ... Kansas, your next. 

Election issues for a Prop. 13 type proposal in Nevada. 

Onward in the S.D. funding suit (the testimony in this case is pretty extensive).

When charter school leadership goes bad ...

The Florida Supreme Court slaps some hands in Florida over the voucher ballot mess. 

Slashing special olympics? Gutsy.

Meeks, the leader of the Chicago boycott, gets his meeting with the Governor. 

Getting rid of abstinence education money ... in Kentucky? 

Wanna check inspection information about your kid's bus online? You can in NJ. 

Now that's ironic. 

Around the Ed. Law Blogosphere:

I'm envious of Jim Gerl. So, Jim ... why no robe? Might as well go full blast! Come to think of it, maybe hearing officers would get more respect if they wore a robe? Jim also has part II  in his series on special ed. eligibility. 

Mark W. has a kid being disciplined for a fake MySpace page. Rightfully so, I think. Anyway, a good off-campus case. Also, OCR weighs in  on race-neutral admission policies. 

Howard F. has a N.C. District looking to add creationism to the curriculum. So, are we done with Intelligent Design? 

Should students spy on their teachers with camera's ... Wrightslaw takes it on. 

Patrick Fanelli has a good overview  of the Penn. homeschooling case. 

Michelle Laubin has ED giving some advice on FERPA. 

Campaign K-12 finds that Palin thinks she is a product of Title IX. 

For your Friday Fun: 

With the market crashing, maybe it is a good time to buy land? It's cheap right now. Hey, I can dream, right? Me and Delmar:  

I'm gonna visit those foreclosing son-of-a-guns at the Indianola Savings & Loan, slap that money on the barrelhead and buy back the family farm. You ain't no kind of man if you ain't got land.

Google Document Link: Friday Snippets: 09/19/08 - In the market for land?

Friday Snippets: 9/12/08 - The Palin Chronicles

Here is a story you didn't see on the front page, but it should have been.

It is hard not to feel bad for California's schools. Legislators won't reach a budget, plus another education secretary resigns this week. There seems to be a real lack of leadership at the state level ... ahem, governator?

The Paducah shooter is asking for a new sentence.

Testimony in the S.D. School Finance suit continues. Montana's school funding suit goes back to court.

In Arkansas, a law prohibiting sex between teachers and students is upheld, even if the student is over 18.

The Chicago $$ reward system.

The judge in the NJ school administrator pay and pension lawsuit is hoping for a settlement.

No advertising on public school buses in S.C. - hadn't heard of that before.

Rumblings under the surface in the Utah voucher epic.

Ken Starr just can't seem to stay away from education. (Couldn't he prosecute a President or something ... maybe one that lied to the American public?)

Student loan companies get an ethics code. 

A Pennsylvania property tax constitutional challenge case is heard.

This is interesting ... if I ever find myself on death row ... no way am I going to burn.

A group in Indiana suggests free community college. 

And, a group of Palin inspired stories:

    Paying for praying for pipelines in Alaska.

    Sex Ed. ... (1) ... (2) ...

    If you want to talk more about Palin or any education aspects of the election, feel free to do so in the forum.

Around the Blogosphere:

Mark Walsh has this interesting panel discussion. I am going to try to make it, but I have a different meeting scheduled against it at the moment.

Mark also has another black armbands case.

Erin B. has an update on the Title IX case before the Supreme Court this term. This is going to be a very important case, so keep an eye on this one and I will have more on it as it gets closer.

Howard F. has another Good News Club case, this one out of Minnesota.

Jim Gerl is getting impatient with our Candidate Request and starting to make quips ... "Is pig lipstick more important than special education"

Dan Meyer is upset with a recent statement by the unions ... and sets the blogosphere abuzz.


For your Friday Fun:

BoardBuzz pointed us to this latest astounding presentation by Michael Wesch. The Superstar Anthropology Professor from K-State on the Anthropology of YouTube.


Google Document Link:Friday Snippets: 9/12/08    

Friday Snippets - 9/05/08: Is this election over yet?

Great NPR spot this week on sexy student clothing ... and what to do about it (audio).

Well, my pleading with the campaign posters at Eduwonk has gone unanswered ... again. This time by the Obama Campaign. There must be some kind of secret truce or something between the parties that they will not address special education under any circumstances.

California administrator associations are challenging the state's 8th grade algebra requirement.

The Prichard Committee here in town thinks Kentucky should be a top 20 education state by 2020 (we have a lot of top 20 goals around here).

The voucher question is back OFF the ballot in Florida.

The Chicago School Boycott has even conservative sources recognizing the funding disparities. NPR took note as well.

The Palin choice has reignited sex-ed debates in North Carolina.

New York City adopts an anti-bullying policy based on biases, sexual orientation included.

The ACLU is taking a stand against schools asking about immigration status.

The South Dakota school funding lawsuit starts.

More on bible classes.


Around the Blogosphere

Erin Buzuvis makes a good point about Title IX and football.

Mitchell R. has a 10th Circuit ruling that FAPE does not necessitate self sufficiency outside of school.

Jim Gerl has IEP Implementation part III.

Texas Teacher Law has a Texas teacher certification Q and A.


For your Friday Fun: Its Time for Some Campaigning -- In honor of the conventions finishing up. h/t Matthew Reed

Google document link: Friday Snippets - 9/05/08: Is this election over yet?

Friday Snippets - 08/29/08 - All Quiet on the Ed. Law Front

It is going to get interesting in Chicago next week. A local representative has reserved a fleet of buses (over 100) to transport as many Chicago Public Schools children as possible to New Trier School District, just north of the city, which is widely regarded as the richest school district in Illinois. (When I taught in Illinois, I too used to make jokes about New Trier).

The NY Times sends a reporter to Harrold, TX (the place where teachers carry guns in school). Like I said earlier, this story is not going away.

A Georgia school has approved 2 Bible Classes.

Nevada's teachers are going to fight their proposed property tax cap in court.

Skip the hearing, keep your teaching license in Alabama, even if you are a registered sex offender (they are suspended, at least).


Around the Ed. Law Blogosphere:

Mark Walsh has details on the 3rd Circuit upholding Penn. homeschooling reporting requirements.

Wrightslaw continues with IEP FAQ's.

Lori Miller Fox does a sequel to her popular "you know you have been a parent of special needs kids too long when..."

And, even though I asked (and was joined by others), McCain advisers did not post anything whatsoever on special education during their time at Eduwonk. I can't say I am surprised. Obama's campaign gave a form response to Jim Gerl this week which didn't address special education at all, so I will ask them next week at Eduwonk, where they are blogging, to give a response on special education as well. We will see how they respond (if at all).

Your Friday Fun:  Since the Internet was not working and I didn't get to show this to my student's last night ... I'll just post it here for all to enjoy ... again.  

 
Google Document Link: Friday Snippets - 08/29/08