Proposed changes won’t serve special needs students

I am a teacher. I have spent my career working with and advocating for students with severe emotional and behavioral disorders. I was privileged to be part of the work group that drafted the two proposals the Iowa Board of Educational Examiners (BOEE) had to choose from for special education endorsements in the State of Iowa.

We were tasked, originally, with creating two pathways to licensure, simplifying the process from the current format. We were informed the administrative rules were being revised and this process was routine - something that was done from time to time. As we addressed the task before us, there were voices of dissension within the work group. I was one of them.

Although I served on the work group that created the proposals being put forth to the legislature by the BOEE, I cannot endorse them.

Simply stated, this proposal is a huge step backward.

This proposal is not what is best for our children in Iowa, especially not for children with the highest needs. The realistic outcome of this proposal returns special education to being a 'place,” instead of a full continuum of services.

Disability among Iowa children ranges from mild to severe, from the domain of learning to the domain of behavior and social/emotional well-being. They range from students who have profound developmental and intellectual disabilities to students who are twice exceptional (TAG and having a disability).

To expect one teacher preparation program to prepare individuals adequately and appropriately to serve one subset of this diverse population is unrealistic, let alone to be prepared to serve ALL of these diverse needs. In rural Iowa, one teacher may and will be tasked with serving all students with special needs.

One reason given for this simplification of the licensure process is that it will address the shortage of special education teachers. I heard the pleas of administrators in rural Iowa saying they cannot find, let alone retain, qualified individuals. I empathize with them. This proposal does not address the shortage of special education teachers. In fact, it may have the unintended consequence of increasing the shortage of Special education teachers in Iowa.

All special educators in Iowa are dual-endorsed. Facing a sunset on their current endorsement, it would be tempting to all but the most dedicated teachers to slide into a position in the general education setting instead of returning to school and incurring the hefty cost of updating their license.

Finally, this proposal does not address the achievement gap between students with disabilities and non-disabled peers.

To paraphrase the Wendy's commercial from the 1980s, 'Where's the data?” We were not presented anything that I, as a researcher, would consider valid data to back this proposal. Yes, some of the states with the smallest achievement gaps have a similar license structure. However, some of the states with the widest achievement gap also have this license structure. So, where's the data? I have not seen it.

There is no correlational data to support the position that the type of license the BOEE is proposing will impact the achievement gap. As an educator and a researcher, I am trained to make data-based decisions. Iowa students deserve the same rigor.

I try to be solution-focused in my professional life. Therefore, I would like to humbly propose the following:

' Withdraw the current, flawed, rules proposal.

' Commit the funds to make a data-driven decision.

' Find the effective practices in states with the smallest achievement gaps through research.

' Fund the research to discover why the special education gap exists within our state.

We have a wellspring of intellectual power in our state in special education at our Iowa colleges and universities. Leverage that talent to solve our problem.

Making a drastic change because we have a gap does not address the reason the gap exists.

' Eric K. Hillman teaches at Southeast Polk Junior High. Comments: eric.k.hillman@gmail.com.