Introduction Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:E:Economics of Education Review:Vol19.Issue4.Oct2000:

Economics of Education Review 19 2000 431–445 www.elsevier.comlocateeconedurev Restructuring special education funding in New York to promote the objective of high learning standards for all students q Thomas B. Parrish Center for Special Education Finance, American Institutes for Research, 1791 Arastradero Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94304-1337, USA Received 15 December 1997; accepted 15 June 1999 Abstract New York has given long and careful consideration to the reform of special education funding in the state. The proposal under consideration, as endorsed by the State Department of Education, is based on a count of all students, as opposed to just special education students, and includes a poverty adjustment. This plan appears to support many of New York’s special education reform goals, and it aligns with national trends. However, the decision to maintain separate funding systems for special education students with certain disabilities may conflict with the state’s goal of educating students with disabilities alongside their nondisabled peers. Also, it is important to realize that achieving high learning standards for students with disabilities will not simply flow from the planned fiscal reforms; it will require careful consideration to ensure that these students are fully included in the state’s system of accountability for all students.  2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. JEL classification: I21; I22 q New York State has recently enacted a new special edu- cation funding formula, somewhat different from the census- based approach outlined in this article. Instead, New York has made major modifications to its long-standing formula—a stud- ent weighting system based on placement. However, the new formula includes several innovations including a fiscal incentive for providing intensive services to students with disabilities within the general education classroom. The new formula also provides for preferral interventions and supports to students, provisions to ensure that students with disabilities are involved in the general education curriculum, and requirements for dis- tricts with disproportionate placements in special education based on race and ethnicity to take correction action. The new provisions will stay in place through the 2001–02 school year, at which time their impact will be evaluated and used to deter- mine further modifications to the formula beyond 2001–02. Fax: + 1-650-858-0958. E-mail address: csefair.org T.B. Parrish. 0272-775700 - see front matter  2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 2 7 2 - 7 7 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 - 9

1. Introduction

This paper includes two major sections. The first pro- vides a national perspective on special education finance and related reform issues and proposals, with emphasis on those of particular relevance for the state of New York. The second section looks specifically at the current New York funding system as it pertains to students with disabilities and to promoting high learning standards for all students. New York has been considering special edu- cation finance reform for some time. The paper concludes with several observations. First, the proposed state reforms relating to a funding system based on a count of all students—rather than just special education students—and using the proposed poverty adjustment, appears to support many of New York’s reform goals. These proposals are also in alignment with national special education reform trends at the federal level and in an increasing number of the states. Second, the decision to maintain separate funding systems for 432 T.B. Parrish Economics of Education Review 19 2000 431–445 special education students “with excessively high costs in public schools, with disabilities requiring summer pro- grams, and with disabilities educated in approved private special education schools” seems likely to conflict with the state’s reform goal of ensuring that students with dis- abilities are educated with their nondisabled peers to the greatest extent possible. Last, realization of the goal of high learning standards for students with disabilities can- not be expected to simply flow from these fiscal reforms. This objective is likely to be much more difficult to obtain. While the proposed fiscal reforms may foster a more supportive environment for high learning stan- dards, strategies for ensuring that students with dis- abilities are fully included in the state’s system of accountability for all students, thereby benefitting from these high standards, will need to be carefully devised and rigorously implemented if significant gains are to be realized.

2. National context