“Rising Costs for Special Education are Impeding Pay Raises for Teachers, Districts Say.”[1]

While this headline is very concerning, sadly, it was predictable and is not surprising. What is surprising is this: The long-building crisis it describes is finally out in the open. Rising special education costs impede school programs and opportunities for every public-school student. There, I said it.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m a passionate supporter of public education for all students, including students with disabilities, and worked in that arena since 1964 — as a teacher, hearing officer (administrative law judge) adjudicating special education disputes, school attorney, and author; and I’m a parent and grandparent of children who were or are in public schools and a citizen of our great nation who wants it to thrive. I’ve seen it all and have written several books about public education. We do have huge challenges.

If we actually believe (I do not) that more than 20% of our students are disabled — that is one out of every five students![2] — then the current situation — funding shortages for general education because the funds are spent for special education — will only get worse, much worse.

Why so? For the same reason that this headline was predictable. Let’s think this through. US public education has many programs that target various student groups with different needs and requirements, but only one program has the privileged status of being an individual “entitlement” — the right to benefits and services granted by law. Under the federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), first enacted in 1975, students with disabilities and their parents have this status.

Today, the law is implemented at the federal, state, and local levels throughout our nation. Under various names, the IDEA has existed for 49 years. Its purpose is to ensure that all students with disabilities (SWD) have access to a free appropriate public education. The law is enforced both through the expansive bureaucracy that’s been built and through the mandatory due process dispute resolution system. Under this law, parents of SWD have the right to dispute any education program that the district offers to their child. They can seek an administrative hearing and ultimately, judicial review. Alas, lawyers have taken over. Special education has grown a costly mansion industry of specialists, educators, consultants, advocates, lawyers, hearing officers, judges, bureaucrats, and paper pushers at all levels of government. This individual entitlement is unique in US public schools.

No other group of students has such a right — not minority students, not immigrants, not low-income students, not English learners, not advanced students, not average students. No one.[3]

Special education is the ultimate example of mission creep — the gradual broadening of the law’s purpose and mission. It is also an example of how good intentions can go awry. In 1975, the IDEA was enacted because, at the time, many SWD were routinely barred from school or ended up in the back of classrooms without services. During that 1970’s civil rights era, Congress enacted this adversarial due process, entitlement approach to assure enforcement its new law. But times have changed.

Now we face the opposite challenge. The law succeeded! All SWD have access to school programs. To educate them, we have created a huge infrastructure of rights, procedures, endless box-checking and red tape, meetings, paperwork for teachers, and, too often, long Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), some more than 30 pages long. Unfortunately, much of today’s special education effort goes to implementing procedures and mindless compliance, which, too often, are unrelated to helping students learn well.

Yet, even with the new reality built over these 49 years, the law has not fundamentally changed — except to grow ever bigger and more adversarial. Together — the services, bureaucracy, and due process — continue to raise school costs. Thus, this worrisome headline.

Let’s be honest. What did we expect if we ever thought of the long-range consequences of this law? If we create one program within our nation’s public school system of 16,800 districts and 49.6 million students which offers an entitlement for one group of students and their parents — that program will expand incrementally and increasingly. So here we are.[4]

It gets worse. Fairness issues arise as more general education programs get cut or reduced (no more music; no more advanced math, larger classes, etc.) for lack of funding. This leads more parents to view their children as possibly needing special education supports, especially as the stigma for requesting services has worn off over the years. In short, this crotchety old system is unsustainable. The numbers bear this out.

Nationally, in the 2022–23 school year, 7.5 million students ages 3–21 received special education and related services under the IDEA. This is a doubling of special education student enrollment from 1976–77 (8 % vs. 15%).[5]

It gets even worse. While special education enrollment continues to rise, the general education population enrollment has declined or remained flat. Between 2012 and 2022 (during COVID), while special education enrollment increased from 6.4 million students to 7.5 million (its highest number to date), public school enrollment, which was at its highest in 2019 at 50.8 million, declined by almost 4%. In 2024, it was at 49.6 million. [6]

Clearly, this situation is not sustainable. We need a fix. Now. What to do? We have students to educate. We have students with disabilities (SWD) to educate. We need to educate all students in order for them and for our nation to thrive. It’s a big challenge.

Here are three suggestions.

1. Consider other paths to support students. The two largest groups of students now served by this law are those who have specific learning disabilities (SLD) at 32% and students with speech and language impairments at 19% of all SWD. Taken together, these two groups make up more than half of all SWD.

Tragically, a large percentage of students with SLD are so-labeled because they didn’t learn to read or do basic math in the K-3 grades. There are many reasons for this, including the fact that the US is still bound up in methodology disputes: the “reading wars” –endless battles between the phonics and “whole language” approaches and the “math wars”. For the sake of our little children, these “wars” need to end.

Since speech and language impairment is the second largest category of SWD, let’s encourage all adults to focus on early language acquisition in families and the community, including preschools, by speaking endlessly to and with very young children. Recall the 1995 landmark study about the “30 million-word gap” that highlighted the reality that many poor children hear or use fewer words than other children and enter kindergarten already behind. Schools then have to play catch up.

In short, prevention — getting little children to read, do basic math, and speak more before third grade is a far better national approach than trying to play catchup later. We need to reduce the number of SWD by teaching these important life skills to very young children.

2. Consider whether the entitlement is needed any longer. Do we still need it now that all SWD have school access and programming? If so, what purpose does it now have? Even asking such questions is super challenging since our government is very bad at retracting rights or entitlements. In fact, I can’t think of an example when that was done successfully. If only Congress had included a sunset provision in this law back in 1975 — assuring the law’s end once it achieved its purpose — to be replaced, perhaps, by a new law. Instead, 49 years of this system has created a huge industry of special interest groups and inertia with damaging mission creep, waste, and misguided policies. Yes, it’s a huge step to even ask these questions — but perhaps we’re in luck.

3. Timing is everything. Consider whether now is the time to press for change. Today, we have two encouraging reasons to do just that.

First, the recent election opens the opportunity for us to rethink and redo many government programs — including this one.

Second, we’re on the cusp of the 50th anniversary of this law, signed on December 2, 1975 by President Gerald Ford. Besides celebrating its success in providing access to education for all SWD, let’s dare to dream big and open a debate about the way forward — how to teach students, including students with disabilities, in a system that is sustainable and fair for all.

Let’s give ourselves permission to ask big questions: How might we rethink the system? Do we still need this entitlement law? If so, what is its purpose now? Is there a better way forward? Can we tweak/amend it? How do we return schools to the leadership and authority of educators, instead of bureaucrats and lawyers? Can we focus on best practices for children — not for procedures, box-filler uppers, or prevailing in due process hearings?

As we embark on today’s promising political opportunity and celebrate the law’s 50th anniversary, I hope we can transform the worrisome headline into a wake-up call going forward. Let’s create a system for our 21st century reality and work together for a bright, successful, learning-based US public school system for all students.

[1] November 17, 2024. This headline ran while teachers in three Massachusetts school districts were on strike.

[2] As they do in Massachusetts and several other states.

[3] There may be a reader or more who thinks the solution is to set up entitlements for more groups. In my view, that would be disaster for public schools — though it would be good for lawyers.

[4] https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

[5] https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/the-number-of-students-in-special-education-has-doubled-in-the-past-45-years/2023/07

The percentage of public school students served under IDEA varies by state. Here are some examples:

Pennsylvania, New York, and Maine: 21%

Idaho and Hawaii: 12%

Puerto Rico: 37%

Northern Mariana Islands: 11%

U.S. Virgin Islands: 9%

[6] I found numbers hard to compare over time. For one source, please visit https://nces.ed.gov › fast facts › display.

This was originally posted on Medium