Caseload/Class Size in Special Education September 2003 by Terry L. Jackson

Similar documents
FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution

medicaid and the How will the Medicaid Expansion for Adults Impact Eligibility and Coverage? Key Findings in Brief

2016 Match List. Residency Program Distribution by Specialty. Anesthesiology. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis MO

Student Admissions, Outcomes, and Other Data

2017 National Clean Water Law Seminar and Water Enforcement Workshop Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Credits. States

46 Children s Defense Fund

About the College Board. College Board Advocacy & Policy Center

Average Loan or Lease Term. Average

Junior (61-90 semester hours or quarter hours) Two-year Colleges Number of Students Tested at Each Institution July 2008 through June 2013

TRENDS IN. College Pricing

Disciplinary action: special education and autism IDEA laws, zero tolerance in schools, and disciplinary action

Trends in College Pricing

STATE CAPITAL SPENDING ON PK 12 SCHOOL FACILITIES NORTH CAROLINA

Redirected Inbound Call Sampling An Example of Fit for Purpose Non-probability Sample Design

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools

Wilma Rudolph Student Athlete Achievement Award

Two Million K-12 Teachers Are Now Corralled Into Unions. And 1.3 Million Are Forced to Pay Union Dues, as Well as Accept Union Monopoly Bargaining

Anatomy and Physiology. Astronomy. Boomilever. Bungee Drop

Brian Isetts University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Anthony W. Olson PharmD University of Minnesota, Twin Cities,

School Year 2017/18. DDS MySped Application SPECIAL EDUCATION. Training Guide

Trends in Higher Education Series. Trends in College Pricing 2016

A Profile of Top Performers on the Uniform CPA Exam

Housekeeping. Questions

Greta Bornemann (360) Patty Stephens (360)

Discussion Papers. Assessing the New Federalism. State General Assistance Programs An Urban Institute Program to Assess Changing Social Policies

State Limits on Contributions to Candidates Election Cycle Updated June 27, PAC Candidate Contributions

NASWA SURVEY ON PELL GRANTS AND APPROVED TRAINING FOR UI SUMMARY AND STATE-BY-STATE RESULTS

Multi-Year Guaranteed Annuities

Emergency Safety Interventions Kansas Regulations and Comparisons to Other States. April 16, 2013

cover Private Public Schools America s Michael J. Petrilli and Janie Scull

2013 District STAR Coordinator Workshop

Canada and the American Curriculum:

CHILDREN ARE SPECIAL A RESOURCE GUIDE FOR PARENTS OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES. From one parent to another...

Update Peer and Aspirant Institutions

Proficiency Illusion

2014 Comprehensive Survey of Lawyer Assistance Programs

STATE-BY-STATE ANALYSIS OF CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

Career Services JobFlash! as of July 26, 2017

JANIE HODGE, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Special Education 225 Holtzendorff Clemson University

CLE/MCLE Information by State

History of CTB in Adult Education Assessment

STRONG STANDARDS: A Review of Changes to State Standards Since the Common Core

Clinical Review Criteria Related to Speech Therapy 1

NCSC Alternate Assessments and Instructional Materials Based on Common Core State Standards

The Effect of Income on Educational Attainment: Evidence from State Earned Income Tax Credit Expansions

Financial Education and the Credit Behavior of Young Adults

Systemic Improvement in the State Education Agency

NC Community College System: Overview

Gena Bell Vargas, Ph.D., CTRS

CONTINUUM OF SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES FOR SCHOOL AGE STUDENTS

Curriculum Vitae of. JOHN W. LIEDEL, M.D. Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrician

TEAM Evaluation Model Overview

The following tables contain data that are derived mainly

EPA Approved Laboratories for UCMR 3

TENNESSEE S ECONOMY: Implications for Economic Development

Personnel Administrators. Alexis Schauss. Director of School Business NC Department of Public Instruction

Milton Public Schools Special Education Programs & Supports

HiSET TESTING ACCOMMODATIONS REQUEST FORM Part I Applicant Information

Guide to the New Hampshire Rules for the Education of Children with Disabilities

The College of New Jersey Department of Chemistry. Overview- 2009

Special Education Program Continuum

Kannapolis City Schools 100 DENVER STREET KANNAPOLIS, NC

California Rules and Regulations Related to Low Incidence Handicaps

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Findings from the 2005 College Student Survey (CSS): National Aggregates. Victor B. Saenz Douglas S. Barrera

ATTRIBUTES OF EFFECTIVE FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE ON.

July 28, Tracy R. Justesen U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Ave, SW Room 5107 Potomac Center Plaza Washington, DC

Plainview Old Bethpage John F. Kennedy High School 50 Kennedy Drive Plainview, NY Guidance Office: Fax:

Accommodation for Students with Disabilities

DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES FOR STUDENTS IN CHARTER SCHOOLS Frequently Asked Questions. (June 2014)

As used in this part, the term individualized education. Handouts Theme D: Individualized Education Programs. Section 300.

PROGRAM SERVICE CODE

Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities Part 3: Referral & Evaluation Process; Documentation Requirements

Trends & Issues Report

ESE SUPPORT & PROCEDURES ESE FTE PREPARATION ESE FUNDING & ALLOCATIONS

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER b: PERSONNEL PART 25 CERTIFICATION

Disability Rights Center v. Maine Department of Education: Recommendations of the Department of Education Corrective Action Plan Work Group

SEN INFORMATION REPORT

Pyramid. of Interventions

INDEPENDENT STUDY PROGRAM

Free Fall. By: John Rogers, Melanie Bertrand, Rhoda Freelon, Sophie Fanelli. March 2011

James H. Walther, Ed.D.

Special Diets and Food Allergies. Meals for Students With 3.1 Disabilities and/or Special Dietary Needs

Memorandum RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION. School School # City State # of Years Effective Date

Special Education Services Program/Service Descriptions

Glenn County Special Education Local Plan Area. SELPA Agreement

ELLEN E. ENGEL. Stanford University, Graduate School of Business, Ph.D. - Accounting, 1997.

SPECIAL EDUCATION DISCIPLINE DATA DICTIONARY:

IDEA FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART B, Additional Requirements, 2008

Basic Skills Plus. Legislation and Guidelines. Hope Opportunity Jobs

Writing Functional Dysphagia Goals

Set t i n g Sa i l on a N e w Cou rse

B.A., Amherst College, Women s and Gender Studies, Magna Cum Laude (2001)

Fisk University FACT BOOK. Office of Institutional Assessment and Research

Riverside County Special Education Local Plan Area Orthopedic Impairment Guidelines Table of Contents

Susanna M Donaldson Curriculum Vitae

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Arlington Public Schools

Understanding University Funding

Transcription:

QTA A brief analysis of a critical issue in special education Caseload/Class Size in Special Education September 2003 by Terry L. Jackson Introduction The size of instructional groups has always been an important issue in the provision of special education services. It has been assumed that students with disabilities who have difficulty in a general class setting would be more successful in a smaller group with more individualized attention. However, federal legislation governing the education of students with disabilities, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act passed in 1975 and later renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) had no specific provision concerning caseloads or class size. Subsequent reauthorizations of the law did not add such provisions. All such requirements are set up under individual state laws and no two states have exactly the same specifications. Project FORUM at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) documented extensive variation among states on this topic (Ahearn, 1995; Project FORUM, 2000). School districts provide services for students with disabilities through teachers and a wide variety of related service providers, such as speech and language therapists, occupational and physical therapists, psychologists, etc. State regulations/policies vary in specificity in terms of the providers and ratios covered by their requirements. Some prescribe ratios for all types of service providers, while others make only general distinctions between teachers and related service personnel (Ahearn, 1995; Project FORUM, 2000). To address frequent inquiries on this topic, Project FORUM updated its previous work for this QTA, which provides an overview of current state regulations/policies on caseload/class size for special education. Data collection for and writing of this QTA was conducted by Project FORUM through NASDSE s Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). Background Federal laws governing services for students with disabilities do not contain any specific requirements for caseload or class size. The Assistant Secretary of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services at the U.S. Department of Education explained the role of federal oversight in this area in a letter to a member of the House of Representatives who had inquired about the issue (Letter to Fascell, 1991). The letter states that IDEA does not specify student-teacher ratios and that states may establish such ratios. However, it notes that, in doing This document is available in alternative formats. For details, please contact Project FORUM staff at 703-519-3800 (voice) or 7008 (TDD)

so, the states must ensure that a free appropriate public education (FAPE) is provided for all children in the least restrictive environment. Thus, although the federal government does not prescribe specific instructional group sizes or caseloads, it does have oversight responsibility in this area through OSEP s monitoring of state implementation of the IDEA. It is not unusual for states to differ in the implementation of IDEA in the absence of specific federal provisions on certain topics. There are many factors that have operated over time to support and extend the differences among states. For example, caseload and/or class size is sometimes negotiated by teachers unions or other professional bargaining units. Another possible reason for the significant variance in caseload/class size provisions among the states is the absence of research linking caseload/class size and improved student outcomes. A literature review published in 2001 states, The extant research provides few clear empirical directions for policy makers, administrators and educators attempting to formulate consistent caseload policies (Russ, Chiang, Rylance and Bongers, 2001, p.167). Methodology Data collection for this QTA was a three-step process. The first step was a search of the National State Policy Database (NSPD) 1 in March 2003. Second, if information was not found on a specific state in the NSPD, that state s Department of Education website was searched. The third step involved sending a letter in April 2003 to all directors of special education in the 50 states and 11 non-state jurisdictions requesting caseload/class size regulations or guidelines that could not be obtained electronically through either of the first two steps. A reminder letter was sent in May 2003 to those states that did not respond to the first letter. Terminology There is no uniformity in the way states use the terms caseload and class size in their regulations/policies. Also, some use only class size, some use both terms and others use the term teacher-pupil ratio. For the purposes of this document, the following definitions are used to be consistent with previous Project FORUM documents. Caseload refers to the total number of students for whom a teacher has some degree of responsibility. Class size refers to the number of students a teacher is instructing at any given time (Ahearn, 1995; Project FORUM, 2000). Report of Findings State Regulations/Policies Thirty-one states have some regulations and/or policies on caseload/class size. Two of the 31, Massachusetts and North Carolina, are currently revising their regulations/policies. Nineteen states do not have state regulations/policies on caseload/class size. 2 However, two of the 19 are 1 The National State Policy Database at http://www.glarrc.org/resources/nspd.cfm is a joint project of NASDSE and the Great Lakes Regional Resource Center to provide searchable access to state departments of education rules and regulations for special education. 2 Project FORUM did not receive feedback from one state and the 11 non-state jurisdictions. Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 2

currently working on developing regulations/policies. Kansas removed caseload/class size requirements from its special education regulations in 2000. See Table 1. Table 1 States with Regulations/Policies on Caseload and/or Class Size States with Regulations/Policies N=31 AR, CA, CT, GA, IA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN, UT, VA, WI, WV * ID and WY are currently developing regulations/policies. LEA Policies States with No Regulations/Policies N=19 AK, AL, AZ, CO, DE, FL, HI, *ID, KS, MD, MT, ND, NE, OR, SD, TX, VT, WA, *WY The three states that do not have state-level requirements for caseload/class size offered information as to the responsibility of the local education agency (LEA). For example, Arizona s LEAs are required to set their own caseload/class size requirements. Maryland uses a local staffing plan submission as a local administrative planning tool. Oregon has a non-prescriptive caseload provision that leaves determination of caseload to LEAs. This provision is based on a belief that students with disabilities receive an appropriate education based on their IEPs rather than on a caseload regulation (Oregon Department of Education, 2001, p.6). Characteristics of State Regulations/Policies The 31 states that have regulations/policies on caseload/class size base them on one or more of the following factors: age/grade of student, presence of a paraeducator, educational setting, type of service, disability category or severity of disability. The most common is age/grade of student (24 states) and the least common is severity of disability (15 states). However, 30 of the 31 states with regulations/policies in this area use a combination of factors. Table 2 and the narrative that follows summarize the individual factors and a subsequent section discusses combinations. Table 2 Factors/Characteristics of State Regulations/Policies Factors/Characteristics Number of States Age/Grade of Student 24 Presence of a Paraeducator 23 Educational Setting 22 Type of Service 20 Federal Disability Category 20 Severity of Disability 15 Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 3

Age/Grade of Student Twenty-four states specify regulations/policies on caseload/class size by age or grade of student. The following examples reflect the diversity of state policy. Tennessee determines its regulations/policies by three grade level groupings (K-3, 4-6, 7-12). Maine s regulations/policies specify teacher/student ratios for self-contained services: ages 5-9, 1:6; ages 10-14, 1:8 and ages 15-20, 1:10. Presence of a Paraeducator Twenty-three states tie their caseload/class size regulations/policies to the presence of a paraeducator (e.g., an aide or assistant in the classroom who supports the teacher in the provision of educational services). For example, Virginia permits a maximum class size of eight students when a paraeducator is in the classroom 100 percent of the time and a maximum of six students without a paraeducator 100 percent of the time. This Virginia policy also varies by disability category. Minnesota s regulations/policies specify one program support assistant for ten students and two program support assistants for 12 students. As in the case of Virginia, this policy also varies by disability category. Educational Setting Twenty-two states have regulations/policies for caseload/class size based on the educational setting (i.e., the environment in which the student is receiving the special educational services). For example, in Utah a teacher s active caseload for the homebound/hospitalized self-contained service option for students with disabilities may not exceed 15. In Rhode Island, when half of the class is on work placement, the maximum class size may exceed 10 children with disabilities. Type of Service Twenty states have regulations/policies that refers to the type of service provider (e.g., speech/language therapist, resource specialist, audiologist, physical therapist). For example, in California the average caseload for language, speech, and hearing specialists in districts or special education local plan areas cannot exceed 55 cases. Ohio s regulations/policies state that an audiologist may provide services to no more than 100 school-age children or no more than 75 preschool children; an occupational therapist may provide services to no more than 50 schoolage children and no more than 40 preschool children. Disability Category Twenty states specify caseload/class size for at least one or more of the federal disability categories. 5 Louisiana has regulations for all 13 federal disability categories. For example, a maximum of four students with autism are permitted in a self-contained classroom in elementary and secondary school. Arkansas regulations specify provider/pupil caseload for three 5 Federal disability categories include: autism, deafness, blindness, emotional disturbance, hearing impairment, mental retardation, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairment, other health impairment, specific learning disability, speech or language impairment, traumatic brain injury and visual impairment. Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 4

disabilities speech/language impairment, hearing impairment and visual impairment. For example, the caseload is 1:20 for students with hearing impairments receiving itinerant services. Severity of Disability The least common factor/characteristic found in state regulations/policies on caseload/class size is the severity of disability 15 states. For example, in Illinois, instructional classes for students who have either a profound/severe disability or multiple disabilities may have a maximum enrollment of five students; whereas, classes for children whose primary disability is moderate visual or auditory impairment may have a maximum enrollment of 12 students. In New Hampshire, a maximum teacher/student ratio of 1:8 or 2:12 shall be maintained, unless the severity of disabilities warrants the assignment of additional staff. Preschool/Early Childhood At least 18 states have caseload/class size regulations/policies for children birth through five years of age, although not all of the 18 states cover this full age range. Information on the birth through two age range may be incomplete because only 11 state education agencies (SEAs) are the lead agency for this age group; therefore, caseload regulations/policies may not be available on the NSPD or state department of education website. Also, Project FORUM did not specifically request information for this age group. Combination of Factors/Characteristics As noted previously, of the 31 states that have regulations/policies on caseload/class size, 30 use multiple factors/characteristics. There are five states that use all six factors/characteristics and four states that use as few as two factors/characteristics in its regulations/policies. See Table 3. Table 3 Number of States with Multiple Factors/Characteristics in Regulations/Policies Number of Factors/Characteristics Number of States 6 5 5 9 4 5 3 7 2 4 North Carolina uses a combination of five Factors/Characteristics (disability category, presence of a paraeducator, age/grade of student, educational setting and severity of disability) in its regulations/policies. For example, hearing impaired students in a separate class, pre-k through 6 th grade, shall have a maximum class size of seven students with one aide. Hearing impaired students in grades 7-12 shall have a maximum class size of nine with an aide. The maximum class size is four with an aide for hearing impaired students who are severely handicapped. Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 5

New Mexico uses a combination of four characteristics (age/grade of student, educational setting, type of service, and severity of disability). For example, the teacher-student ratio for school-aged children shall not exceed 1:24 for a special education teacher and 1:35 for a speech/language pathologist when special education services are provided less than 50 percent of the school day. For 3 and 4 year olds in center-based special education programs, the teacherstudent ratio must be 1:4 and for children with profound educational needs, 1:2. Pennsylvania uses a combination of three Factors/Characteristics (disability category, type of service and age/grade of student) in its regulations/policies. For example, the teacher-student ratio for students in a full time life skills curriculum at the elementary level is 1:12 and 1:15 at the secondary level. For teachers/professionals providing itinerant services to students with visual impairments, the maximum caseload is 50. Wisconsin uses only two Factors/Characteristics (type of service and presence of a paraeducator) in its regulations/policies. For example, the maximum caseload for a full time school physical therapist may be 30 children or 45 children with one or more school physical therapist assistants. Characteristics of caseload/class size regulations/policies by state can be found in Table 4. Other Criteria Some states regulations/polices reference factors/characteristics other than those described above. Iowa specifies that the teacher of a resource-teaching program shall serve no more than two attendance centers. Connecticut s regulations/policies specify that the number and age range of children requiring special education and related services assigned to a class shall be such that the specifications of each child s individualized education program (IEP) can be met. Similar to Connecticut, North Carolina states that the class size of a special education teacher and the caseload of a related service provider shall be limited in number to allow the type and intensity of services required by the IEP. Eleven other states also make similar references to implementation of the student s IEP in regard to caseload/class size Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Minnesota. Concluding Remarks Over 60 percent of states have some type of regulation/policy addressing caseload/class size in regard to students with disabilities. However, these regulations/polices vary greatly from state to state. Most commonly, regulations/policies are based on a combination of the following factors/characteristics presence of a paraeducator, age/grade of student, educational setting, type of service, disability category and/or severity of disability. Since Project FORUM s 2000 review of state regulations on caseload/class size, eight states have made some changes with regard to this issue four states no longer show caseload/class size as part of their regulations/policies, two states are revising their current policies and two states are implementing new procedures. As is the case with other policy areas, caseload/class size regulations and polices are changing and evolving. Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 6

In the absence of a strong research base on caseload/class size related to outcomes for student with disabilities, states are expected to continue to develop or revise policy based on input from teacher unions, related service provider associations and other states regulations/policies. Ahearn, E. (1995). Caseload/class size in special education: A brief analysis of state regulations. Alexandria, VA: Project FORUM at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 390, 193). Letter to Fascell, 18 IDELER 218 (1991). Oregon Department of Education (2001). Special education caseload study: Serving students with disabilities. Salem, Oregon: Author. Project FORUM (2000). Special education issues in caseload/class size. Alexandria,VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education. Available: www.nasdse.org/forum.htm Russ, S., Chiang, B., Rylance, B.J., & Bongers, J. (2001). Caseload in special education: An integration of research findings. Exceptional Children, 67, 161-172. This report was supported by the U.S. Department of Education (Cooperative Agreement No. H326F000001). However, the opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position of the U.S. Department of Education, and no official endorsement by the Department should be inferred. Note: There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please credit the source and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material. This document, along with many other FORUM publications, can be downloaded from the Project FORUM at NASDSE web address: http://www.nasdse.org/forum.htm To order a hard copy of this document or any other FORUM publications, please contact Carla Burgman at NASDSE, 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 320, Alexandria, VA 22314 Ph: 703-519-3800 ext. 312 or Email: carla@nasdse.org Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 7

State Age/ Grade Table 4 Characteristics of Caseload/Class Size Regulations/Policies by State Paraeducator Educational Setting Type of Service Disability Category Severity of Disability AR x x x x x 5 Number of Factors CA x x 2 GA x x x x x 5 IA x x x x x 5 IL x x x x x x 6 IN x x 2 KY x x x x 4 LA x x x x x x 6 MA x x x 3 ME x x x 3 MI x x x x x 5 MN x x x x 4 MO x x x x 4 MS x x x 3 NC x x x x x 5 NH x x x x 4 NJ x x x x x 5 NM x x x x 4 NV x x x x x 5 NY x x x x x x 6 OH x x x 3 OK x x 2 PA x x x 3 RI x x x x x x 6 SC x x x x x 5 TN x x x 3 UT x x x x x x 6 VA x x x 3 WI x x 2 WV x x x x x 5 24 23 22 20 20 15 Caseload/Class Size in Special Education Page 8