The Commissioner’s Advisory Panel (CAP) for Special Education Services was established pursuant to P.L. 94-142, Education of the Handicapped Act. Section 4403(6) of State Education Law, section 612 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and sections 300.167- 300.169 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) prescribe its responsibilities. The Panel provides recommendations to the Commissioner of Education and Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities (VESID) with respect to special education and related services for children with disabilities in New York State. The Commissioner shares appropriate recommendations with the Governor and Legislature.
During the 2005-06 school year, CAP:
reviewed and provided comment on the section 616 State Performance Plan as required by the U. S. Department of Education (USDOE), Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).
reviewed and provided comment on proposed changes to Part 200 of the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education.
were informed and commented on the status of the State’s Special Education Teacher Certification structure.
were informed and commented on the status of the State’s Preschool Longitudinal Study
reviewed and commented on impartial hearing data and changes to the impartial hearing reporting system.
wrote a letter of support regarding legislation to increase funding to post-secondary education for students with disabilities.
were updated on the New York State Schools for the Deaf and Blind and the State Education Department’s (SED) Vocational Rehabilitation Redesign.
discussed and made recommendations on the Regents Priority Legislation and Department Legislation.
were provided an overview of the guidelines for the use of IDEA funds allocated by local educational agencies (LEA’s) through vendor relationships and the proposed guidelines for both vendors and municipalities.
CAP Subcommittees
In addition to the work completed as a full Panel, the three standing subcommittees (1) preschool special education, (2) transition of students with disabilities from one system to another, and (3) the development of personnel involved in the education of students with disabilities made several contributions throughout the year.
The Preschool Subcommittee:
reviewed and discussed Indicator # 7 – Preschool Outcomes of the State Performance Plan for 2005-10.
received a report from Cindy Gallagher of the State Education Department (SED) on the Regents Policy on Early Childhood. The Committee had discussions on the:
- need for scientifically based research in reading instruction in early childhood programs,
need for curriculum building in literacy and math especially at the PreKindergarten, Kindergarten and in preschool special education programs,
- increase in State funds for PreK and full-day Kindergarten, and
legislative support for statutory changes concerning PreK, compulsory age and full-day Kindergarten.
The Transition Subcommittee reviewed:
the transition elements of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) proposed regulations and make recommendations for change. Specific issues such as the impact of NCLB on students with disabilities and school districts as well as funding concerns were discussed with Subcommittee members so as to enable them to make recommendations.
the Continuous Improvement Plan (CIP) comments and final draft of the transition section especially with regard to local compliance. The Subcommittee made several recommendations to SED regarding transition components.
The Transition Subcommittee recommended:
development of process/protocol for when a student is transitioning to and from a residential/out of district/psychiatric placement to support the student’s education program. This may include a list of guidelines and process for sharing the individualized education program (IEP) and exchanging other information. CAP will work on this in the coming year.
increased involvement with mental health agencies and professionals.
The Personnel Development Subcommittee discussed:
problems associated with getting special education teachers to be deemed highly qualified through the use of HOUSSE in all core subjects for special classes.
the need for alternative models to producing teachers who can move to different certification areas within special education as teachers mature or develop desires to teach in different areas.
how to overcome the obstacles of implementing inclusion models at the middle and secondary levels and where there may be successful inclusion models at that level. Elementary models are typically easier to implement than middle/secondary models. At the high school level, scheduling students with disabilities is a challenge.
the need for more unified special education and general education teacher preparation programs.
The Personnel Development Subcommittee recommended:
the use of guidance counselors at the high school level to recruit students to go into secondary teaching.
developing a plan and specific timeline to integrate all SED offices and their associated technical assistance networks. There is a need for a systematic way to provide staff development to all agencies, public and non-public schools.
having preservice and inservice teacher development programs share common goals, strategies and materials.
that SED collect data on the skill sets necessary to be successful school administrators so they may consider those skills as they write the revised standards for administrative certification and that SED collect pipeline data on the numbers of proposed administrators participating in administrator preparation programs.