Top News Stories
UFT VP: State regs should be revised
Apr 10, 2008 4:47 PM
UFT Vice President Carmen Alvarez (left) tells State Education Department officials (from left) Barbara Nussbaum, Alison Conners and Joanne LaCrosse of widespread noncompliance by city principals with the legal requirement to provide IEPs to all appropriate staff.
In March 26 testimony before the State Education Department on proposed amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004, UFT Vice President Carmen Alvarez deplored the failure of the proposed regulations to ensure that teachers of special education students be included in key meetings and receive copies of any agreements resulting from those meetings.
She also called for a simplification of the language of the regulations and clarification of the responsibilities of the chairs of district Committees on Special Education.
Alvarez said, “It is difficult to fathom the Department’s rationale for excluding the child’s teacher from these meetings and from receiving a copy of the agreement that they will be responsible for implementing. Surely the child’s teacher has important information to offer regarding the curriculum and the learning or behavior issues that precipitated the request to refer or the referral.”
Alvarez urged revisions that would require teacher participation in any meetings in which alternatives to special education are discussed and that teachers receive a copy of any written agreement entered into by the parent and the district as a result of the meeting.
She cited the widespread noncompliance by city principals with the legal requirement to provide IEPs to all appropriate staff that the UFT documented and the State Education Department’s recent directive to the city Department of Education to notify principals to comply with the law.
The union leader also took exception to the complicated language of proposals. “Regulations,” she said, “are supposed to help people understand and implement the law.” She urged the state to follow the U.S. Department of Education’s lead and create a single reference document for parents, state personnel, school personnel and others to use rather than forcing them to shift between one document for regulations and a separate document for the statute. “The special education community in New York State deserves no less,” she concluded.
Alvarez was concerned that the proposed amendments do not clearly spell out the responsibilities that representatives of school districts will have in their new role as chairs of Committees on Special Education. She stressed the importance of clear language directing the chair to base decisions on special education supports and services solely on a child’s unique needs and not on funding, availability of staff, space or other adminstrative considerations unrelated to the child’s needs.
