|
|
|
 |
AEP Online |
AEP Seeks 200 Letters on IDEA Regs by Sept. 6 DeadlineUnder provisions in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), local school districts can set aside up to 15 percent of federal funds for students who have not progressed academically, but do not need special education. Under these new "early intervening programs," the law states that any instructional materials used must be proven effective through research methods that are considered "scientifically-based." While all supplemental materials undergo rigorous scientifically-based research (SBR)--such as pre- and post- field testing, comparison groups and correlation studies--many school districts mistakenly assume that supplementals do not qualify for federal funds if they do not meet the "gold standard" of randomized clinical trials required of more comprehensive curricula. In fact, in an informal survey of supplemental educational publishers, 60 percent of those polled reported encountering difficulties with LEAs who didn't completely understand the implications of the SBR clause. Last year, AEP worked with Washington Partners, LLC, to bring this misconception to the attention of the legislators involved in the reauthorization process. As a result, language was included in the IDEA Conference Committee Report that specifically identified supplemental materials as viable options for use in early intervention instruction. While this was a victory in terms of recognition, the main goal was to have language incorporated in the law's regulations. Over the past eight months, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has accepted comments and held numerous hearings regarding the regulations of the reauthorized IDEA, during which period they have received in excess of 6,000 recommendations. AEP and its members have been closely involved in this process, testifying at hearings in addition to submitting a number of written comments. Unfortunately, the DOE has taken the position of regulating as little as possible; therefore, few--if any--of these comments and recommendations were taken into consideration in the law's regulations. AEP's fall back position is now to ensure that this issue is addressed in the preamble to the new IDEA regulations. Immediate action is needed, as this may be supplemental publishers' last chance to have language included with the reauthorized bill making clear the fact that their products are eligible for IDEA funding. To this end, AEP and Washington Partners have organized a letter-writing campaign with the goal of gathering at least 200 testimonials from companies who have witnessed firsthand the confusion caused by SBR requirements. A sample letter can be found on the AEP website at the address below, along with a timeline of recent developments and contact information for the DOE. The deadline for submission is September 6. Success on this endeavor is important not only for the sake of SBR clarification, but for demonstrating the supplemental educational publishing industry's role as a concerned constituency. To submit comments: http://www.regulations.gov Mail to: Questions, ideas, or in need of more information? Please contact Stacey Pusey at 856-241-7772. |
Find out more on AEP's Government Relations pages |
|
©
2008 The Association of Educational
Publishers
|
||
