Archived Information

Legislative Elements Related to Special Education

The second part of the review examines the extent to which states make specific references to special education programs or students with disabilities in their charter school statutes. For this phase of the analysis, we read the state statutes for goals, accountability and assessment procedures, specific educational service requirements, and special education funding. These issues are likely to have a major impact on the implementation of special education programs in charter schools, and their delineation in legislation indicates a particular emphasis placed by the state. The following paragraphs describe the results of the state charter school statutes review for these issues.

Similarly, none of the 18 states with statutory requirements that charter school students participate in standardized statewide assessments (Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Texas) makes specific reference to assessment in relation to students with disabilities. Historically, states have exempted many students with disabilities from participation in statewide assessments.⁵ The 1997 amendments to IDEA clarified that such broad-based exemptions will no longer be possible. This may create unique challenges for charter schools whose accountability goals are tied to statewide assessments. In order to make the appropriate individualized decisions regarding the participation of children with disabilities in state and district-wide assessments, charter school personnel will need to become familiar with the guidelines for the provision of auxiliary or supplemental aids and services and for determining the need for alternative assessments.

Educational services. The issue of whether charter schools are required to use the local districts special education services and personnel is not directly addressed in any state charter school statutes. Three statutes, however, do contain special provisions that relate to this issue. The New Hampshire statute requires that the proposed charter contain "the method for coordinating with the pupil's LEA [local education agency] responsible for matters pertaining to any required special education programs" and further states that "the funding and educational decision-making process for educationally handicapped pupils attending a charter or open enrollment school shall be the responsibility of the local education agency and shall retain all current options available to the parent and to the LEA." The Ohio statute asserts that "a representative of the [intermediate education unit] knowledgeable about special education and related services shall participate in the development of the individualized education program for any student identified as a handicapped child." The Nevada statute states that if a charter school determines that it is "unable to provide an appropriate special education program and related services for a particular disability of a pupil, [it] may request that the board of trustees of the school district of the county in which the pupil resides transfer that pupil to an appropriate school."

Closely related to the provision of educational services is the issue of whether states require special education teachers working in charter schools to be certified. As described previously, seven states require charter schools to employ only certified teachers, and 10 states allow charter schools to hire a percentage of non-certified teachers. No state charter school statute, however, specifically addresses the issue of special education certification. States may provide clarification in rules and regulations. For example, the Arizona Department of Education has published guidelines that maintain that although the charter school statute exempts charter schools from all laws and rules relating to schools and school districts, including teacher certification requirements, the statute also requires charter schools to comply with all federal and state laws relating to the education of children with disabilities, which includes certification requirements for special education teachers. Therefore, Arizona charter schools must employ certified special education teachers under the same conditions as other Arizona public schools. Although beyond the scope of this review, similar linkages no doubt exist in other states.

Special education funding. Most states address special education funding in their charter school statutes by directing that charter schools receive a proportionate share of state and federal categorical funds. An important issue, especially in those states that allow out-of-district enrollment in charter schools, is who bears the excess cost if the per-pupil allotment for a special education student is insufficient to cover the expense of appropriately educating that student at the charter school. Colorado, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania place this ultimate responsibility for funding special education on the students' districts of residence. Other state statutes do not address this issue but do address a similar one regarding charter school students with disabilities requiring private day school, residential school, or other special classes or treatment programs. Delaware, Massachusetts, and New Jersey require districts to bear the cost of sending a charter school student with a disability to a special facility.

-###-

[General Legislative Provisions]

[Other Legislative Elements Affecting Students with Disabilities]