Bulletin Boards |Shopping & Classifieds |Calendar |About Us

Front page

Behavior Management

Conflict Resolution

Early Intervention

For Educators

For Families

Internet & Assistive Technology

Recreation & Sports

Specific Disabilities

State By State

Transition

Washington Watch

Site Map

PENNSYLVANIA ADVOCATES KNOCK PLANNED LAW CHANGES

October 13, 1999

As the wave of IDEA-mandated state law changes rolls across the United States, Pennsylvania is facing a storm of controversy over its planned adjustments. The state plans to adjust its regulations to more closely match the 1997 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, but state advocacy groups say the changes will likely eliminate valuable services provided under current state law. The board's Standing Committee on Special Education opened to public comment a list of proposed changes to chapter 14 of the state law, holding several public forums in September and October. Written comments are being accepted through Friday.

"The committee has developed a draft of Chapter 14 which reflects its decision to craft minimal regulations referencing federal law and regulations while adding a limited number of Pennsylvania-specific requirements," the group said in announcing its proposed alterations. As reported, federal allocation of special education funds hinges on compliance with the law, though states have rarely been punished for missing that mark.

While the state characterizes the changes as "minimal," the Pennsylvania School Reform Network complains they could leave a bare-bones structure only vaguely resembling the state's current special education plan. The Education Law Center-PA and Pennsylvania's Protection and Advocacy Children's Project are supporting the Reform Network's stance.

"Rather than set high standards for kids, the Board has chosen to eliminate the standards completely. Rather than take a leadership role in the field of special education, the Board has chosen to tell school districts that they need only do the minimum," the Reform Network's Ellen Mancuso charges. Though she does not indict the state board's new plan as below the federal standard, Mancuso argues the state would be backtracking from its more progressive ways. "Pennsylvania has always considered itself a leader in the field of special education. Apparently, it is prepared to abandon that position," she says.

The School Reform Network identified seven areas in which advocates believe the state's approach is flawed. First, the planned new law would incorporate by reference the federal code for many provisions, while the advocacy group would rather see the rules spelled out so educators and parents do not have to master both sets of regulations. The new rules would also leave class sizes and age spans in each resource room or classroom up to individual school districts to determine.

Since IDEA '97 does not require pre-hearing conferences for parents pursuing due process for disputes with school districts, Pennsylvania is moving to eliminate them from its regulations. Under current rules, parents can seek an informal conference with school officials whenever they are unhappy with a student's placement or special education program. While IDEA '97 sets out clear and more specific new guidelines for formal due process hearings, the Reform Network argues the informal meetings are a valuable way to keep the dispute from going that far. "Hearings are formal, much more adversarial, and usually require the family to hire a lawyer," Mancuso argues.

Current Pennsylvania law also has more stringent limits on multiple suspensions than IDEA '97. While the federal law allows multiple suspensions of up to 10 days at a time, Pennsylvania law requires a "change in placement" hearing after 10 consecutive days or 15 cumulative days of suspension. The new Pennsylvania rules would defer to the federal regulations. The new state law would also remove some of the paperwork requirements to provide parents advance copies of student evaluations before individualized education plan meetings. As reported, access to information before and after IEP meetings is a frequent concern for parents and teachers attempting to provide services for special ed. students.

According to the Reform Network, the state is also looking to cut back on early intervention programs for very young children, requiring evaluations every other year rather than every year and no longer allowing parents to request an additional year of early intervention programs for kindergarteners. The Reform Network also criticized what it calls state proposals to "completely do away with" state standards for screening and evaluation.8