-->

The accreditation issue associated with the SOL's, seems to be generating many changes...some for the better and some for the worse.

It is my understanding that students enrolled in Functional Academics classes will take an Alternative Assessment and will not be counted in the 70/30 Pass/Fail rate that is linked to a school's accreditation.

Just what is the definition of Functional Academics? Heretofore in my school system the only classes that were classified as Functional Academics were self-contained classes where basic life skills were taught, mostly in terms of functional reading, writing and math. Our school system is now moving towards eliminating self contained classes for regular diploma credit. Presumably this is so that students will be mainstreamed into classes taught by teachers certified in the subject areas such as English, U.S. History, Algebra I, Biology, etc. The thinking is that this will enhance their opportunities to do better on the tests. At the same time, however, collaborative teaching was not offered as a model for I.E.P. development, perhaps because of the cost factor involved in providing this model. Students who have been in self contained classes in the past who are in pursuit of a regular diploma would need to be mainstreamed in order to continue to do so. This, I believe, is an extremely risky practice in terms of the intent of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

For example, a student who is classified as Emotionally Disturbed, who may have an IQ of 120 and who has above average skills, but, because of their disability, cannot succeed in a mainstreamed, or for that matter, co-taught class, would have to be placed in a Functional Academics class. Will that student also take an Alternative Assessment? Why would this young person be denied access to a regular diploma when they are proven to have the necessary skills required to meet Standard or even Advanced Diploma requirements?

An article in the Daily Press on Thursday, July 15th spoke to the issue of teaching certification. The article was based on a report from the Thomas Fordham Foundation, a privately run school-reform research organization. It stated that "Researchers say students whose teachers have any kind of certification (standard, emergency or alternative) outperform students whose teachers have no certification or are certified in a different subject." I wonder if this applies to teachers who are certified in special education.

In the past our special educators have taught the SOL's in their special ed. classes for regular diploma credit. Since the new accreditation issue has come into the limelight, there is some question as to whether that should be allowed. The State DOE, however, has not yet changed their policy set back in 1989 which allows for this to occur. I believe it is because, by not offering classes for regular education credit in a self contained setting, this may adversely affect that student with a disability that needs a self contained setting to experience success. It particularly affects Emotionally Disturbed students and Other Health Impaired students who may have Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Is it ethical to require those students to take an Alternative Assessment and to lower their expectations in striving for a Standard or Advanced Diploma? This certainly seems to be in direct opposition to the Virginia Board of Education Statement dated September 29, 1998: "Setting Passing Scores on the Standards of learning Tests: Principles and Considerations." That statement speaks to RAISING student achievement. For a capable student, in our case, who will be forced to take a class labeled Functional Academics because they cannot succeed in a mainstream or even co-taught setting, this will certainly not be the case! AND shouldn't the capability of the student be the criteria for determining their course selection and whether or not they will take the regular SOL's?

I will be most interested in hearing from a representative from the DOE who may be deealing with these issues, or better yet, someone who may be able to interpret the application of these proposed policies as they relate to the IDEA.

Dear Ms. Reichert:

The alternate assessment, which is being developed this year, will be for students who are not participating in the general curriculum, but who are being instructed through a functional, life-skills curriculum. We expect that a relatively small number of students will participate in the alternate assessment. The Standards for Accrediting Public Schools state that "evaluating the performance of schools shall take into consideration the percentage of eligible students who achieve a passing score on the prescribed SOL tests or, for those students with disabilities who cannot participate in the SOL tests, a proficient level score on an alternative assessment prescribed by the Board."

If you will contact the Office of Special Education and Student Services (804/225-2402) you may request a copy of the performance indicators that have been developed as a basis for the alternate assessment. The term "functional academics" is only one strand of these indicators.

When you review the performance indicators, you will note that they would not be appropriate for students with above-average skills as mentioned in the example you gave in your message.

The Department of Education is examining the current policy of awarding credit for courses taught by special education teachers who are not endorsed in the respective content area. It is expected that DOE will issue some guidance to school divisions soon.

Mr. H. Douglas Cox, director of the Office of Special Education and Student Services, would be the appropriate DOE person to provide further information on the alternate assessment initiative. He may be reached at 804/225-2402.