Skip to main content

Meeting of the Board of Regents | June 2003

Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 11:00pm

 

THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

TO:

The Honorable the Members of the Board of Regents

FROM:

Lawrence C. Gloeckler

COMMITTEE:

Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities

TITLE OF ITEM:

Special Education in the Large Five Cities

DATE OF SUBMISSION:

May 19, 2003

PROPOSED HANDLING:

Discussion

RATIONALE FOR ITEM:

Policy Direction

STRATEGIC GOAL:

Goals 1 and 4

AUTHORIZATION(S):

SUMMARY:

In New York State, 43 percent of the pupils enrolled in special education are in the large city school districts where adequate support services in general education are limited, greater numbers of teachers are uncertified, and the lack of resources makes it more difficult to provide quality instruction and early intervention for these students. This means a greater likelihood that these students will have less access to a rigorous general education curriculum, which results in lower performance on State assessments and less likelihood of meeting graduation requirements. As a result, their ability to access postsecondary education and employment may be affected.

The attached report summarizes the performance of special education programs in the large five cities - New York City, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers - in regard to Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) placement and student achievement Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). The report presents many complex issues impacting the implementation of special education services as well as the current efforts undertaken by the large five cities and the State Education Department to improve the performance of students with disabilities.

 

 

Attachment

SPECIAL EDUCATION IN THE LARGE FIVE CITIES

Executive Summary

During the 2001-02 school year, there were 3,414,439 school-age students in New York State, of whom 404,210 (11.8 percent) were classified as students with disabilities. Of all the State's students with disabilities, 170,341 (42 percent) resided in one of the large five cities, ranked from largest to smallest based on total student enrollment as of fall 2001--New York City, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers. Thirty-six percent (146,328) of New York State�s school-age students with disabilities lived in New York City.

The last two reports to the Board of Regents on special education data (June 2002, April 2003) focused on the outcomes for students with disabilities and special education placement patterns across New York State. They also included data demonstrating that the performance and placement of students with disabilities vary considerably based upon the needs and resources of the district in which students reside. In New York State, the largest numbers of racially and ethnically diverse students are concentrated in the five high need large city school districts where adequate support services in general education are limited, greater numbers of teachers are uncertified and students with disabilities are likely to be served in restrictive special class placements. For these students, this means they are less likely to have access to a rigorous general education curriculum, which results in lower performance on State assessments and less likelihood of meeting graduation requirements; as a result, their ability to access postsecondary education and employment may be affected.

To ensure a more sustained and permanent impact on the performance of students with disabilities in the large five cities, the Department needs to:

  • continue to focus on a unified instructional system that recognizes that a successful special education program is dependent upon a successful, high quality general education program;
  • target IDEA discretionary funds and other available fiscal and personnel resources for strategies designed to impact student performance including the increased reliance on research-based instructional practices;

  • analyze current mandates and propose to the Regents statutory and regulatory revisions to modify or repeal those State mandates that are not impacting on improving student outcomes and may be adding unnecessary requirements; and

  • authorize a continuum of interventions/consequences when progress is not achieved.

SPECIAL EDUCATION IN THE LARGE FIVE CITIES

Introduction

During the 2001-02 school year, there were 3,414,439 school-aged students in New York State, of which 404,210 (11.8 percent) were classified as students with disabilities. Of all the State's students with disabilities, 170,341 (42 percent) resided in one of the large five cities, ranked from largest to smallest based on total student enrollment as of fall 2001--New York City, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers. Thirty-six percent (146,328) of New York State�s school-age students with disabilities lived in New York City. Despite the proportion of the statewide student enrollment in the large five cities, especially New York City, their performance is often masked when data are presented as statewide averages. It is only when data from the large five cities and the rest of the State are disaggregated that performance trends and issues become clearer.

The last two reports to the Board of Regents on special education data (June 2002, April 2003) focused on the outcomes for students with disabilities and special education placement patterns across New York State. They also included data demonstrating that the placement and performance of students with disabilities vary considerably based upon the needs and resources of the district in which students reside. In New York State, the largest numbers of racially and ethnically diverse students are concentrated in high need school districts where adequate support services in general education are limited, greater numbers of teachers are uncertified and students with disabilities are likely to be served in restrictive special class placements. For these students, this means they are less likely to have access to a rigorous general education curriculum, which results in lower performance on State assessments and less likelihood of meeting graduation requirements; as a result, their ability to access postsecondary education and employment may be affected.

The purpose of this report is to summarize the performance of special education programs in the large five cities in regard to least restrictive environment (LRE) placement and student achievement. In addition, this report will review current interventions by the Department in the large five cities as well as present future strategies for consideration.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Data is collected on a variety of Key Performance Indicators in order to track districts� performance relative to student outcomes and other important measures for students with disabilities. Despite positive trends in several areas, the generally poor performance of general education students in the large five cities is predictive of the even poorer performance of students receiving special education services. With some exceptions, students with disabilities in the large five cities are placed in more restrictive settings and demonstrate significantly poorer performance outcomes as compared to disabled peers in other school districts across New York State.

Classification Rate

One of VESID�s key performance indicators is the classification rate of students needing special education.

  • Buffalo, Rochester and Syracuse have substantially higher classification rates (16.8, 15.1 and 16.9 percent, respectively) compared to 11.0 percent in New York City and 10.7 percent in Yonkers.

Least Restrictive Environment

Educational placement data are reported to the State based on the number of students with disabilities who are educated in regular school buildings and the percentage of time those students participate in general education classes, as illustrated below. Students reported as receiving services in separate educational settings are educated in buildings that are attended by students with disabilities only.

General education classrooms 80 percent or more of the school day

  • There is considerable variability in the rate students with disabilities are placed in general education classrooms for 80 percent or more of the school day across the large five cities. Buffalo (55.6%), Rochester (56.9%), and Syracuse (54.1) have a placement rate that is consistent with the 55 percent rate in other school districts. Yonkers (35.4%) has the lowest rate of placement in this type of setting. In New York City, there is a positive trend with placement in this type of setting increasing from 39.9 percent in 1995-96 to 45.9 percent in 2001-02.

  • Overall, a lower percentage of minority students with disabilities in the large five cities receive services in general education for most of the school day as compared to White students.

General education classrooms less than 40 percent of the school day

  • Yonkers, New York City, Rochester and Buffalo continue to over-rely on special education placements where students are in general education classrooms less than 40 percent of the school day (51.1, 44.1, 34.2, and 33.4 percent respectively). This compares to 19.7 percent in other school districts and the State average of 28.6 percent.

  • Overall, greater percentages of minority students with disabilities in the large five cities spend most of the day in special classes as compared to White students (26.3 percent of White students as compared to 45 percent of Black, 44.3 percent of Hispanic, 36.7 percent of Asian/Pacific Islander and 42.4 percent of American Indian/Alaskan Native).

Separate educational settings

  • The large five cities placed 8.1 percent of students with disabilities in separate educational settings as compared to 5.3 percent in other school districts and the 2000-01 national average of 4.2 percent. Between 1995-2002, New York City's placement rate in separate educational settings decreased from 15.1 to 8.5 percent while Syracuse's rate remains the lowest at 2.5 percent. Rochester, Yonkers and New York City place students in separate educational settings at approximately twice the frequency of the national average.

Note: Yonkers has indicated the need to refine and resubmit their 12/1/01 placement data, which may change their LRE percentages as well as those of the large five cities as a group.

Performance on State Assessments

One key indicator under the goal of students receiving special education services meeting high educational standards is enhancing participation and performance in the State testing program. Data on these indicators are presented below:

English Language Arts (ELA) and Math Examinations Results � 2001-02

Elementary Level

  • In all other school districts combined, 76.6 percent of general education students performed at or above Level 3 on the ELA compared to only 50.9 percent in the large five cities. This performance gap also exists for students with disabilities; 40.4 percent achieve proficiency in other school districts compared to 16.1 percent in the large five cities. New York City, Syracuse, and Buffalo had the lowest percentages of students with disabilities performing at the proficient and advanced levels: 14.7, 16.4, and 20.2 percent respectively, as compared to Rochester (32.8 percent) and Yonkers (29.9 percent).

  • In all other school districts combined, 82.8 percent of general education students performed at or above Level 3 on the Math examination compared to only 56.3 percent in the large five cities. The difference in performance at or above Level 3 for students with disabilities is similar to ELA performance, 21.4 percent in the large five cities compared to 49.7 percent in other school districts.

Middle School Level

  • While 60.2 percent of general education students in all other school districts combined performed at or above Level 3 on the ELA, only 32.8 percent in the large five cities did so. This discrepancy is also evident for students with disabilities, 13.2 percent in other districts compared to only 3.1 percent in the large five cities.

  • In all other school districts combined, 65.3 percent of general education students performed at or above Level 3 on the Math examination compared to 32.7 percent in the large five cities. Similar to ELA performance, only 4.4 percent of students with disabilities in the large five cities performed at or above Level 3 as compared to 21.6 percent in other school districts.

Disaggregated performance data for the elementary and middle level assessments reveal that students with disabilities in low need districts actually perform at a proficient level with greater frequency than nondisabled students in the large five cities.

Regents Examinations

  • In English, the number of students with disabilities in the large five cities who passed in 2001 (1,628) is nearly 80 percent more than the number who took the test in 1997 (927). However, only 36.7 percent of students with disabilities in the large five cities who took the test passed with a score of 55 or higher compared to 72.2 percent in the other school districts.

  • In Sequential Math Course I and Math A Examinations, there was a 176 percent increase in the number of students with disabilities tested in the large five cities between 1997-2001 (106 percent in other school districts). In 2001-02, 18.4 percent (810) of students with disabilities in the large five cities passed with a score of 55 or higher compared to 47 percent in the other school districts.

  • The numbers of students with disabilities taking the Regents exams in the large five cities since 1997 have continued to be disproportionately low compared to the percent of students with disabilities enrolled in the large five cities. For example, although the enrollment of students with disabilities in the large five cities is 43 percent of the all students with disabilities in the State, these students represented only 21 percent of the students taking the Regents English Exam in 1997 although that increased to 32 percent in 2002.

These data indicate that full access to Regents level coursework continues to be a serious concern in the large five cities. With less than five percent of students with disabilities demonstrating proficiency at the 8th grade level, there appears to be insufficient opportunity for them to gain the skills needed to succeed in Regents coursework upon entry into high school.

Regents Competency Test (RCT)

  • In 2002, 53 percent of the all students with disabilities who took the Reading RCT were from the large five cities compared to their enrollment of 43 percent of all students with disabilities in the State.

  • The passing rate for students with disabilities on the Reading (42.9%) and Math (35.6%) RCTs in the large five cities was significantly lower than the passing rate in all other school districts combined (76.4% & 71.1%, respectively).

For students with disabilities in the large five cities, these data reveal not only a greater reliance on Regents Competency Tests but continued difficulty meeting even the lower level standards represented by these tests.

Graduation Rate

  • The percent of students with disabilities earning Regents, local or High School Equivalency diplomas in the large five cities increased from 46.5 to 50.9 percent from 2000-01 to 2001-02. In other school districts, the rate remained the same in both years at 74.1 percent. These data are predictive of the inverse relationship between the percentage of students with disabilities in the large five cities who indicated they plan to attend postsecondary education (38.1%) versus the percent in all other school districts combined (52.2%).

  • The graduation rate for Black (46%) and Hispanic (49.6%) students with disabilities improved in the large five cities but continues to be significantly lower than the graduation rate for White students (63.1%).

Issues Impacting the Performance of Students with Disabilities

There are many issues impacting the poor performance of students with disabilities. Some are specific to the large five cities but many reflect special education practices or systemic issues faced by school districts in general. These issues include:

  • There is a historical reliance on the use of "special class" and "separate school" models for greater percentages of students with disabilities in the large cities as the means to provide students with the extra support they need. In general, students with disabilities in the large five cities spend less time with nondisabled peers and have less access to opportunities to be involved in challenging coursework and activities related to reaching higher academic standards.

  • Staff recruitment and retention problems result in personnel shortages and uncertified staff, especially bilingual staff, who are critically needed in the large five cities to prepare students to meet the learning standards. Many of the more experienced teachers who are appropriately certified completed traditional pre-service training programs that did not focus on general education requirements. Based on data for all teachers, the large five cities have the largest percentage of teachers without appropriate certification compared to other school districts. When students with disabilities in the large cities are placed in general education classrooms 80 percent or more of the day, lack of sufficient numbers of certified general education teachers impacts student performance as much as lack of special education certified teachers.

  • The complex administrative structures of the large five cities, especially New York City, which is undergoing organizational restructuring, can lead to a separation of instructional units that does not foster either a sequential curriculum or the continuous communication necessary for smooth transitions between elementary, middle and secondary level progams.

  • The lack of fiscal resources in the large five cities for both general education and special education programs results in large class sizes and diminished access to current curriculum materials and appropriate equipment � including computers, laboratory materials, and occupational and technical education opportunities. Adequate resources within the general education environment are necessary in order for students with disabilities to benefit from integrated educational opportunities.

Current Department Initiatives

VESID and EMSC have established several strategies to improve the performance of students with disabilities in the large five cities. Examples are highlighted below.

IDEA State Improvement Grant (SIG)

The Department was awarded a competitive State Improvement Grant under IDEA to address systemic, root-cause issues associated with low academic performance for students with disabilities and measures of disproportionality. A primary feature of the grant program is targeting specific buildings in the large five cities and providing financial support and intensive technical assistance to support buildings in conducting root-cause analysis and developing outcome-based school improvement plans. In 2002, the Department was awarded a supplemental grant to develop and/or pilot new technical assistance programs addressing disproportionality, parental involvement, access to general curriculum, and teacher retention. Most of these programs will be piloted and refined in specific targeted schools with a long-term goal of widespread replication throughout the cities.

Reading and Math Improvement Initiatives

In 1998, VESID implemented a six-year statewide initiative to close the gap between the performance of students with disabilities and their nondisabled peers in reading and math. This Initiative provides targeted technical assistance to over 120 buildings in 38 districts, including the large five cities, to bring research-based practices into the classroom. Thirty-five of the buildings (29 percent) are on the Most Improved Schools list, including seven buildings in Syracuse, Rochester and Yonkers. Data indicate that the achievement gap is lessening for students with disabilities in buildings that are participating in the reading and math initiative.

During 2002-03, EMSC held seven Regional Middle Level Mathematics Institutes, including separate Institutes for Buffalo and Rochester school districts. Each Institute targeted classroom teachers (including special education teachers) and persons with building level responsibilities for intermediate level mathematics. The Institutes addressed standards-based mathematics, the core curriculum and key ideas, the test specification and blueprint, and practical classroom strategies and web-based resources. A longer-term Mathematics Initiative is being planned which may involve the regional mathematics advisory groups, coaching services and Virtual Learning Space (VLS) applications.

Chapter 405

Within Chapter 405 of the Laws of 1999 are specific provisions that require the Department to identify school districts with: (1) high rates of identification of students as students with disabilities; (2) low rates of declassification of students with disabilities; (3) high rates of placement of students with disabilities in separate educational settings; and (4) significant disproportion, based on race and ethnicity, in identification and placement in particular settings of students with disabilities. All five large cities have been identified for disproportionality issues with Buffalo, Rochester and Yonkers also identified for high rates of placement in separate educational settings and Buffalo and Syracuse for high classification rates. Each of the cities has been receiving either individualized targeted technical assistance or group regional training through the Special Education Training and Resource Center (SETRC) network.

Focused Reviews

VESID's Special Education Quality Assurance (SEQA) Unit has initiated a Focused Quality Assurance system, which prioritizes outcome measures in the areas of Least Restrictive Environment, Achievement, and Transition/Exiting. The new process includes a root cause analysis that moves beyond compliance into programmatic issues and effective practices. New York City is participating in three focused reviews this year and Syracuse has been participating in a focused review in the area of Achievement in four elementary buildings with plans to implement the process district-wide over the next several years. Rochester and Buffalo are scheduled for focused reviews this year and Yonkers in 2003-04. The district must identify specific data elements and set benchmarks to report to the Department demonstrating that, over specific timelines, the efforts made by the district to resolve the identified issues have resulted in improved outcomes for students with disabilities. SEQA regional office staff has been assigned to ensure a continuous presence in each of the large five cities.

Urban Initiative

To support urban school districts in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse and Yonkers and their students, the Department, in partnership with the four cities, created the Urban Initiative. This initiative is designed to provide dynamic, practical tools to enhance student performance in meeting the State�s learning standards. The Urban Initiative consists of three strategies: Superintendent Summit Series, Urban Forums, and On-site School Building Visits. Each is designed to build on and inform the others, so that the synergy of the three strategies creates an environment where capacity can be built and positive results achieved. Four Urban Forums were held during April-September 2002 with a focus on student achievement, attendance improvement and dropout prevention, mathematics, and fiscal planning.

Partnership Agreements

The Department is developing Partnership Agreements with all five large city school districts to be completed by the end of this school year. (In New York City, the District Comprehensive Education Plan is equivalent to the Partnership Agreement in the other four cities). New York City, Buffalo and Syracuse have developed agreements and the Rochester and Yonkers Agreements are being finalized. The purpose of the agreement is to codify a set of mutually agreed-upon priorities, clearly stated outcomes, and actions/responsibilities that the district and State will undertake. The Partnership Agreements promote a strong, focused relationship between the Department and each city to improve services and education results in a manner consistent with the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.

Next Steps

In order to move forward and ensure a more sustained and permanent impact on the performance of students with disabilities in the large five cities, the State Education Department will:

  • Address the needs of students with disabilities in the large five cities through a consistent, coordinated and permanent collaboration among VESID, EMSC, and OHE including the continued development and refinement of the Partnership Agreements and coordination of programs, grants and resources.

  • Continue to focus on a unified instructional system that recognizes that a successful special education program is dependent upon a successful, high quality general education program. The Department must be diligent in requiring an equitable application of the No Child Left Behind requirements to students with disabilities including accountability measures, full access to remedial support and increased reliance on research-based instructional practices.

  • Maintain its commitment to targeting fiscal and personnel resources to strategies designed to impact agreed-upon outcomes in the areas of greatest identified need. This includes the upgrading of VESID�s special education information systems to facilitate its ability to hold districts accountable, track both compliance and performance goals, and allow greater access to this information by school districts and the general public.
  • Expand the implementation of VESID's Focused Quality Assurance system to include a new protocol targeting Transition/Exiting outcomes and processes, including disproportionate placement practices and performance outcomes based on race/ethnicity.

In addition, Regents support is requested for:

  • Statutory and Regulatory Changes

VESID will analyze current mandates and propose to the Regents statutory and regulatory revisions to modify or repeal those State mandates that are not yielding improved student outcomes and may be adding unnecessary requirements.

  • Continuum of Consequences

VESID will review the options available for recognizing districts/schools that demonstrate positive outcomes for students with disabilities as well as for addressing poor performance and/or serious levels of non-compliance. An expanded continuum of consequences needs to be applied in a consistent and timely manner to acknowledge success and to intervene when commitments are not kept and progress is not achieved. These consequences should be consistent with the NCLB requirements and designed to increase public awareness of performance on key indicators as well as provide mechanisms for the Department to apply targeted interventions, such as the redirection of IDEA flow-through funds, if the expected progress does not occur.