1. Special Education: Our Future Role and Needed Policy Supports

2. Lynn Fuchs, Vanderbilt University

3. Improving the Future of Education for All Students with Disabilities Michael M. Gerber University of California Center for Research on Special Education, Disabilities, and Developmental Risk

4. Where Did We Begin? University of California Center for Research on Special Education, Disabilities, and Developmental Risk Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) Education to compensate for the effects of poverty School-level (categorical) planning with parent advisory council Resources to supplement, not supplant, LEA effort Education of Handicapped Children Act (1975) Proactively identify unserved and underserved children with disabilities Provide appropriate education in least restrictive environments Child-level (individualized) planning (IEPs) and program with consent of parents Resources to supplement, not supplant, LEA effort

5. Where Should We Be Going? University of California Center for Research on Special Education, Disabilities, and Developmental Risk Elementary and Secondary Education Act Address poverty and its effects School-level planning Adequate effort by SEAs and LEAs Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Prevention and/or preparation Build capacity of general education to effectively address individual differences Child-level (individualized) planning (IEPs) and program with consent of parents Resources to supplement, not supplant, LEA effort

6. How to Improve Our Policy? University of California Center for Research on Special Education, Disabilities, and Developmental Risk Elementary and Secondary Education Act Growth modeling of cohorts and individual students Targeted professional development School-wide training rather than sanctions Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Support stronger preparation for special education teachers – at least one specialization year post-BA with at least 3 year supervised induction Remove any implication that RTI should or can be the prime identifier of disabilities Birth –Grade 12 IFEPs (Individual Family Education Plans) to incorporate IEPs and transition plans Require plans that link general ed spending of IDEA funds to more specific, non-trivial benefits for students with disabilities

7. SPECIAL EDUCATION: VISION AND PRIORITIES Mabrey Whetstone, Alabama Department of Education

8. Vision A system of support for student learning that enables all students, regardless of demographics, to achieve high levels of academic and behavioral success Classrooms and instruction that embrace technology A renewed emphasis on self-advocacy and youth empowerment

9. Legislative Priorities Include RtI with funding in ESEA as a general education initiative Federal discretionary funds must continue to be made available to all states to assist in addressing instructional innovations, evidence-based models of service delivery, and use of technology to enhance real access to the general education curriculum Federal investments in early childhood education must be increased to provide access to high quality programs and services

10. RICKI SABIA, NATIONAL DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY Parent Perspective

11. Priorities For their child to have meaningful access to the grade level general curriculum- the same core content and experiences that their child’s same age typical peers receive, with supports, accommodations and modifications as needed. An educational setting that is not determined solely by their child’s diagnosis, disability category or the type of statewide assessment that is taken.

12. Vision Silos are gone- Special education tools and strategies and the expertise of special educators should be integrated into general education to benefit all students. Inclusive classrooms are the norm- with UDL, RTI, PBS, and supplementary aides and services, most students with disabilities, including those with ID, should be educated in general education classes. Functional skills have been redefined- focus on the underlying skill sets that can be taught in general education classrooms.

13. Legislative Priorities Strengthen LRE- provide clarification on the LRE process and make LRE implementation an overarching priority in both laws. Diagnosis, eligibility category and type of assessment do not dictate placement. Underscore access to grade level curriculum for ALL- clarify that there are three achievement standards but only one content standard and one curriculum (modified as needed.) Add UDL Provisions- ensure that ALL students have the supports and challenges they need to meaningfully interact with the curriculum and be appropriately assessed and that ALL educators have the tools and strategies they need to teach in today’s diverse classrooms.