Search

The number of students enrolled in alternative settings for youth at risk of school failure has increased significantly in recent years. Students with disabilities, primarily students with emotional/behavioral disabilities and learning disabilities, are included in the population of students who are being educated in these settings. A survey was designed to gather current information about alternative schools and programs across the nation. The survey was distributed to key contacts at state departments of education who were knowledgeable about alternative education. Questions asked about state level definitions, enrollment criteria, school characteristics, students served, staffing, curriculum and instruction, and outcomes. In addition, the survey included questions about special education and the extent to which students with disabilities were enrolled. Results are provided and the report concludes with a discussion of key issues to further examine. (Contains 14 tables.)

Alternative schools have emerged over the years as one educational option for students who are not successful in traditional school settings. The number of these schools is growing rapidly, yet we know very little about similarities in policy and practice across states. This report provides a list and review of current state legislation and policy from 48 states that had some type of legislation addressing alternative schools or programs. Information is organized and discussed with regard to enrollment criteria, alternative school definition, funding, curriculum, staffing, and students with disabilities. Implications of the findings are discussed in relation to historical context and current forces shaping alternative schools today. Appended are policy and legislative citations by state. (Contains 2 tables.)

This report is a review of the alternative education literature, which is scattered across three topic areas--dropout prevention, special education, and at-risk youth. Books and articles for this review were chosen to provide a view of the literature from the beginning of the modern alternative movement, generally considered to be the 1960s, to the present, and to show the progression of research and literature to the present day. Most of the sources are journals and books associated with documenting the alternative moment. In addition, sources from the Internet and research papers from accredited conferences were reviewed. The synthesis is organized into the following sections: the history and context of the alternative school movement; characteristics of specific populations in alternative schools; and the research examining outcomes for students in alternative schools and programs. Findings from the review indicate that while alternatives began in the non-public educational arena, at this time they are most often found in the public school system. Alternatives are typically serving students who are at risk for school failure or are disenfranchised from the traditional school system. Findings on student academic outcomes are mixed. The synthesis concludes with implications for policy and practice. (Contains 74 references.) (CR)

This document presents findings of Project SEARCH, a qualitative research study of how charter schools interpret laws and regulations governing the education of children with disabilities, especially the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The project involved a preliminary 15-state policy analysis followed by in-depth case studies of seven states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Minnesota, North Carolina) and the District of Columbia. Findings identify recurring themes in the areas of governance, service delivery models, accountability, operational issues, and technical assistance. Two central tensions or policy conflicts were also identified: first, balancing procedural regulations and the goal of autonomy and second, negotiating parental choice and special education team decision making. Ten recommendations address the themes identified earlier and include: (1) policy guidance is needed regarding a charter school's local education agency's status as it applies to legal responsibilities under IDEA and related state laws; (2) authorizers should permit charter schools to consider a variety of options for meeting their special education responsibilities; and (3) during the initial start-up (one to three years) charter schools should affiliate with a special education infrastructure. Extensive appendices include details on the study's methodology and executive summaries for each of the state case studies. (Contains 15 references.) (DB)

This report analyzes the reasons why parents in Minnesota choose to homeschool their children. The survey, on which the report is based, is part of a larger study examining each of the types of school-choice options available in Minnesota. Three research questions guided the survey: What are the demographic characteristics of families who choose to homeschool their children? What are the reasons parents homeschool their children? and To what extent is special education or the child's special needs a factor in the homeschooling decision? Participants in the study were homeschooling parents who had at least one kindergarten through 12th-grade child homeschooled in 1997. The results of the survey fell into five major categories: educational philosophy, special needs of the child, school climate, family lifestyle and parenting philosophy, and religion and ethics. Several subcategories within each main topic area were reviewed to understand the parents' reasons. Parents were asked if special education or special needs were factors in their decision to homeschool their child. Results show that special education or the child's special needs was a factor for many parents who homeschooled, which suggests policy implications for both homeschooling parents and special education. Considerable variety in the reasons reported for homeschooling was evident. (Contains 17 references.) (RJM)

This final report includes findings that were published in a December 1996 interim report and additional findings regarding student academic performance. Four types of data collection were used: a descriptive database for charter schools operating in Minnesota; 2-day site visits to each charter school during the spring and fall of 1996 to interview staff, students, parents and a knowledgeable person at the host district, and to conduct informal observations of classes or learning experiences; collaborative work with educators at the charter schools; and a systematic comparison of Minnesota's charter-school legislation and extant charter schools with other states in terms of growth, the role of state education agencies in relation to this growth, and key legislative provisions and policies. The findings revealed that half of Minnesota's charter schools (8 schools) were located in Minneapolis or St. Paul. Minnesota charter schools varied in the grade levels served. They are small, averaging 119 students with a range of 34 to 240 students per school; as of spring 1996, the enrollment of students with disabilities averaged 25 percent. Students with limited English proficiency averaged 10 percent, and students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch averaged 47 percent. Minnesota charter schools have low student-to-staff ratios (averaging 12:1) as compared to a 22:1 ratio in Minnesota public schools generally. (RJM)

In 1991, the Minnesota Legislature enacted the first legislation in the nation to permit creation of legally and financially independent public schools called charter schools. In February 1996, the Minnesota State Board of Education authorized an 18-month evaluation of Minnesota's charter schools. An evaluation team from the University of Minnesota gathered data through a telephone survey of the 16 charter schools in operation during spring 1996; site visits; interviews; analysis of student performance data; a survey of staff, parents, and students; and a comparison of Minnesota's charter-school legislation and charter schools with those of other states. This report includes the findings available as of December 1996. The data show that starting new charter schools is very hard work. Charter schools are hampered by a lack of precedent, a lack of resources, innovation under daily pressure, the creation of school culture from scratch, difficulties in balancing planning and implementation, and environmental pressures. The report does not argue that Minnesota charter schools are failing, but that they are encountering developmental issues that locate them squarely in the experience reported in other public and private sectors. It is recommended that new charter schools: (1) confront the additional stresses that make the press of schooling even more potent in new schools; (2) pay more attention to the needs of teachers; (3) develop themselves as active learning communities yet constrain their aspirations for curriculum development; (4) plan for the socialization of members; and (5) actively engage in designing teachers' roles as well as being flexible and experimental in instruction and curriculum content. A total of 22 tables and one figure are included. (Contains 13 references.) (LMI)

This paper addresses the characteristics of alternative secondary education programs in Minnesota for students with special needs or considered to be "at risk." It examines various alternative school options including Area Learning Centers (which provide personalized year round, day and evening programs for learners aged 12 through adult) and the High School Graduation Incentives Option (a "second chance" program). A survey of 83 directors of Minnesota's alternative programs and 85 teachers in such programs was conducted. The directors' survey collected information on: program demographics, admission/exit policies, special education issues, curriculum and student progress procedures, tracking issues, staff demographics, and organization and decision making issues. The teachers' survey asked questions about the teachers' experiences. Results indicated that the schools surveyed tended to be small, have few support services within the school, use community resources to support the curriculum, exhibit a high level of control shared with staff (though such areas as funding and space allocation were usually decided by district administrators), and have teachers who see these schools as not yet meeting their ideal (though much closer to ideal than the conventional high school). Results also support the value of these alternative programs for serving special needs students. Contains four references. (DB)

This paper synthesizes 5 years of research examining three Minnesota school choice options for students with disabilities: (1) open enrollment; (2) High School Graduation Incentives (a second chance option for at-risk students); and (3) Postsecondary Enrollment Options Program (which allows 11th and 12th graders to enroll in college courses for high school and college credit at no cost). Analysis of the three options addresses program characteristics, participation rates of students with disabilities, impact of transfer as a function of disability classification, student characteristics and reasons for transfer, impact on school districts of transfer of students with disabilities, and program impact. Students with disabilities are participating in each of these options. Questions are raised on the impact of such options on schools, such as how such programs should be evaluated and locus of responsibility for support services. (Contains 22 references.) (DB)

This qualitative study examined the impact of open enrollment policies in Minnesota on eight school districts with larger than average transfers of students with disabilities. A series of case studies investigated implementation issues, effects on special education programs, effects on decision making in funding and planning, perceptions and opinions of school personnel about open enrollment, and characteristics of districts that gain or lose students with disabilities through open enrollment. Results were complex, as enrollment size and program quality alone did not explain the gain or loss of students with disabilities through open enrollment. Administrators and teachers did not give wide endorsement to the idea that the quality of special education programs improved because of open enrollment. Improved communication between school personnel and families did seem to be a key issue in open enrollment. For those districts gaining students with disabilities, there were few negative outcomes; districts losing students with disabilities were losing a great deal. Several recommendations are offered for consideration when evaluating open enrollment and the participation of students with disabilities. (Contains 11 references.) (DB)

The expectations of parents of students with disabilities who transferred schools through an open enrollment option were examined in this qualitative study. In-depth interviews were conducted with parents of 18 children and adolescents who transferred their child through Minnesota's open enrollment law. Interviews addressed: the student's history of special education, reasons for transfer, delineation of student needs, parental expectations of child's school, parental expectations of child's teacher, implementation of the open enrollment option, student change after the transfer, and parental satisfaction. Results indicated that parents transferred their child only after careful deliberation and for well-conceived reasons. The needs discussed most often by parents centered on accommodation and adaptation in their child's program. Other areas emphasized by parents included personal/social adjustment, the need for a warm supportive environment, and home-school communication. (Contains 16 references.) (DB)

A random sample of Minnesota school districts participated in a study that examined the participation rates of students with disabilities in school choice options and tuition agreements. Surveys were sent to 100 Directors of Special Education; the response rate was 74%. The Directors of Special Education were asked to document the number of students with disabilities transferring in or out of their districts by means of open enrollment, high school graduation incentives (HSGI), tuition agreements between boards, and any other enrollment option. A large majority of students with disabilities were found to be transferring school districts using tuition agreements. Students demonstrating emotional/behavioral disorder were found to be the largest disability group (31 percent) transferring schools and utilizing both open enrollment and tuition agreements between boards. The greatest number of students (73 percent) were transferring schools using tuition agreements between boards. Very few participants used the HSGI option to transfer schools. Significant differences were found in participation rates between districts of differing enrollments with districts having enrollments over 20,000 also having the greatest percentage of students transferring in. Possible reasons for the high numbers of students with emotional and behavior disorders are discussed. (DB)

This study examined the extent to which students with disabilities or special needs participate in Postsecondary Enrollment Options (PSEO), a Minnesota program which allows 11th and 12th grade students to complete high school credits at a 4-year or 2-year college or a postsecondary vocational training institution. Directors of the PSEO programs at the 77 participating postsecondary institutions were surveyed. Among findings were: (1) 8 percent of the reported 4,183 PSEO participants were considered to be students with disabilities or special needs; (2) 90 percent of these students were attending technical colleges or the University of Minnesota; (3) 47 percent were identified as having learning disabilities or special needs and 17 percent were gifted; (4) 8% reported English as their second language; (5) 8 percent of students were reported as having mental retardation or developmental disabilities; (6) 42 percent of PSEO students in urban areas were identified as disabled; and (7) Individualized Education Plans existed for 132 of the 318 program participants with disabilities. Comments from respondents addressed concerns about resources, knowledge of handicapping conditions, policy, positive feedback, student characteristics, accessibility issues, and inadequate transition. The study's implications for provision of support services, transition planning, and the need to supply more information to the postsecondary institutions are addressed. (7 references) (DB)

A model developed by the Technical Assistance Customizer (TAC) Project offers state education agencies and other organizations an approach to assist them with converting national findings and resources to state-specific materials in a timely and cost-effective manner. Moreover, the approach recognizes the importance of collaboration with and the input of major stakeholders in the development of usable technical assistance documents that are applicable to state-level audiences. Building upon an approach utilized by leaders at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) and work completed through federally funded projects, the TAC project team designed a technical assistance model specifically to assist state education agencies and other organizations in writing state-specific materials developed from national resources. Although the implementation of special education in charter schools was the specific issue addressed in the development of the TAC Model, application of this approach has merit in the development of state-specific technical assistance materials in other areas. Feedback from TAC participants highlighted the usefulness of the model and its applicability to a broad range of topics of interest to state agencies. The purpose of this report is to share an approach that is effective and mindful of the time and resources available at state and local levels for the development of technical assistance resources and documents. The process is explained through the TAC Project's experience with converting national technical assistance materials on charter schools and special education into state-specific resources. This article includes background on the charter issue, descriptions of the national technical assistance process and customizing approach, the TAC Model's applicability to other types of technical assistance, and a concluding section on lessons learned. (Contains 5 footnotes.)

The purpose of this document is to provide operators with implementation and operational technical assistance related to special education in charter schools. Special education is a very complicated component of public education and providing operators with technical assistance regarding special education is particularly challenging. This primer opens with a general background on legal issues and responsibility for special education in charter schools. It is not intended to be a complete treatment of special education law or classroom practice. In fact, due to the legal foundation upon which special education is built; operators are strongly urged to consult an attorney and experienced special education professionals to assist in the development and implementation of the charter school. This primer includes the questions that should be asked about students with disabilities at each life stage of a charter school. The answers to these questions and suggestions for where to go for more information are intended to provide assistance that is critical to successfully designing and implementing the special education component of a charter school. A glossary is appended. (Contains 9 footnotes.)

The organization and format of this primer which is designed for state officials differs from the other two in this series based on the recommendations of the state officials who participated in the Special Education Technical Assistance for Charter Schools (SPEDTACS) Project state team meetings convened to assist in the development of the set of primers. In accordance with their recommendation, this primer was developed to provide short treatments of critical aspects of special education, to be used separately or in combination, to address specific areas most pertinent to the responsibility of all state officials concerned with special education in charter schools, especially the state director of special education and the state director for charter schools. State officials strongly advised us to produce a document composed of sections that could stand alone and be duplicated for use with new state staff and others who need a brief understanding of particular topics related to including students with disabilities in charter schools. This document is designed to meet this need. A glossary is appended. (Contains 11 footnotes.)

The purpose of this document is to provide charter school authorizers with targeted technical assistance related to special education in charter schools. Charter school laws are unique to each state, and they provide a wide range of policies and practices for the hundred of authorizers chartering schools nationally. As a result, providing authorizers with technical assistance related to special education is particularly challenging. However, with input from a wide range of stakeholders, the authors created this primer to provide charter authorizers with the basic information they need to advise charter schools regarding special education. The document also provides insight into the variety of policies and practices that other authorizers are implementing. This primer opens with a general background on legal issues and responsibility for special education in charter schools and then addresses the various "stages or phases of life" of a charter school, including pre-authorization; authorization; accountability and renewal; and non-renewal, revocation, and relinquishment. It is not intended to be a complete treatment of special education law or authorization practices. In fact, due to the legal foundation upon which special education is built; charter school authorizers are strongly urged to consult an attorney and experienced special education professionals as they develop their policies and practices related to special education in the charter schools they authorize. Glossary is appended. (Contains 6 footnotes.)

This set of primers for charter school authorizers; charter school operators and state-level administrators has been developed to provide background information and resources for the "builders" of charter schools and policymakers to facilitate the successful inclusion of students with disabilities in charter schools. The primers open with a general background on legal issues and responsibility for special education in charter schools. The main sections of the first two primers then follow the "stages or phases of life" of a charter school, including pre-authorization; authorization; accountability and renewal; and non-renewal, revocation and relinquishment. The main sections of the primer for state officials are designed differently to meet the unique needs of state education agencies (SEAs). The sections of that primer include: charter school basics, charter schools and special education basics, key policies and procedural issues for state agency units, key special education policies for consideration by state special education personnel, and SEA assistance during charter school developmental stages. Although there are many complex aspects of developing and managing charter schools, the primers address only those areas most critical to implementing special education successfully in charter schools. They are not intended to be a complete treatment of special education law or practices. In fact, due to the legal foundation upon which special education is built, charter schools and states are strongly urged to consult an attorney and experienced special education professionals for specific legal questions about special education. Those new to the field, those needing an orientation to these areas and those who have some level of responsibility related to students with disabilities in charter schools are the intended beneficiaries of this primer series. Appended are: (1) Glossary; (2) Matrix: Selected Special Education Characteristics in Charter Schools; and (3) Charter Schools and the Education of Children with Disabilities, 2nd Ed.. (Contains 11 footnotes.)

The organization and format of this primer which is designed for state officials differs from the other two in this series based on the recommendations of the state officials who participated in the Special Education Technical Assistance for Charter Schools (SPEDTACS) Project state team meetings convened to assist in the development of the set of primers. In accordance with their recommendation, this primer was developed to provide short treatments of critical aspects of special education, to be used separately or in combination, to address specific areas most pertinent to the responsibility of all state officials concerned with special education in charter schools, especially the state director of special education and the state director for charter schools. State officials strongly advised the authors to produce a document composed of sections that could stand alone and be duplicated for use with new state staff and others who need a brief understanding of particular topics related to including students with disabilities in charter schools. This document is designed to meet this need. (Contains 11 footnotes.)

The purpose of this document is to provide operators with implementation and operational technical assistance related to special education in charter schools. Special education is a very complicated component of public education and providing operators with technical assistance regarding special education is particularly challenging. This primer opens with a general background on legal issues and responsibility for special education in charter schools. It is not intended to be a complete treatment of special education law or classroom practice. In fact, due to the legal foundation upon which special education is built; operators are strongly urged to consult an attorney and experienced special education professionals to assist in the development and implementation of the charter school. This primer includes the questions that should be asked about students with disabilities at each life stage of a charter school. The answers to these questions and suggestions for where to go for more information are intended to provide assistance that is critical to successfully designing and implementing the special education component of a charter school. Appended are: (1) Glossary; (2) Matrix: Selected Special Education Characteristics in Charter Schools; and (3) Charter Schools and the Education of Children with Disabilities. (Contains 9 footnotes.)

The purpose of this document is to provide charter school authorizers with targeted technical assistance related to special education in charter schools. Charter school laws are unique to each state, and they provide a wide range of policies and practices for the hundred of authorizers chartering schools nationally. As a result, providing authorizers with technical assistance related to special education is particularly challenging. However, with input from a wide range of stakeholders, the authors created this primer to provide charter authorizers with the basic information they need to advise charter schools regarding special education. The document also provides insight into the variety of policies and practices that other authorizers are implementing. (Contains 6 footnotes.)

Reviews research on implications of school choice for students with disabilities using multiple methodologies in 12 quantitative and qualitative studies. Participation rates, reasons for transfers, and impacts on students and school districts were evaluated. The study found students with disabilities participating in school choice options often transfer for reasons related to special education programs and services. (Author/DB)

Describes a consensus-building meeting, in which stakeholders representing students attending alternative schools, teachers and directors from alternative schools, high school teachers, directors of special education, and university teacher trainers participated. Participants reviewed and reached agreement on important indicators of educational outcomes for students attending alternative schools. (RJM)

Minnesota has several types of school choice options available to its 750,000 students: open enrollment, second-chance programs, postsecondary enrollment options, and charter schools. Survey data show that the families of special-needs students are increasingly using the open-enrollment option and are satisfied with their choices. Students with disabilities are also taking advantage of the other three options. More research is needed to examine equity issues. (MLH)