Online School Management Systems, or, will you ever talk to your kid's teacher in person again?

As you know, I'm quite interested in the intersection between technology and education: what are the positives?  what are the negatives?  I recently read an article that highlights how the same technology can be both good and bad.

In the WSJ last week (sorry, I am perpetually behind the times), there was an article about how schools are increasingly using online tools to communicate with parents and students - grades, class info, contact information, and upcoming events are increasingly being communicated via online platforms accessible to parents and students.  Picture a facebook page for your kid's classroom - events, other participants, and specific information about how your kid is doing.  You can check out the article here. 

So, the upside, in this increasingly digital world, you can use these systems to (a) communicate with your kid's teacher more regularly - no more waiting for a parent-teacher conference to address a concern, (b) monitor your kid's homework/grades, so that you can intervene if something's going off track, and (c) be able to communicate with other parents.  I certainly know how hard it is to keep in touch with your kid's teachers, and more ways to do it seems better than the alternative.  Working parents may rarely actually see their kid's teachers, and being able to stay in the loop via emails is nice. 

But...on the other hand, is this just another piece of technology that's going to get lost in the noise of all the emails/facebooks/other sites we deal with on a daily basis?  One mom in the article basically abstained from the online school platform, saying it was just one thing too many to deal with.  (I understand that too!  I have, at last count, 7 email accounts).  And despite our texting/virtual world, there is still something to in-person conversations, and building actual personal connections with the people that your child spends the most time with.

And, just to throw another iron into the fire, are these online school systems accessible to people with disabilities?  Recall earlier conversations on this point, on accessibility of digital educational materials and accessibility of communication systems.  If a student is blind, or has vision difficulties, are these online school systems accessible to screen readers?  And what about the parents?  What if a parent is deaf, blind, or has another disability where using online systems requires alternative technologies (like screen readers, or switch systems).  Hmmmm?

I don't have an answer, and I'd be happy to hear what your experiences are with these portals.  Honestly, these systems aren't going away - but we do need to make sure that they are appropriate to all students and their families.

LiveScribe Pens, Round II: Illegal to use in the Classroom?

I remain bemused (saddened?  not surprised?) by stories in which schools actively reject new technologies on spurious premises.  Why can't they see the value of these new tools?  Why is there such a lack of creativity?

This week's tale of bureaucracy comes from a colleague of mine in the special education legal world.  One of her clients is a 10th grader with auditory processing dysfunctions.  On the recommendation of a neuropsych, his parents bought him a LiveScribe pen and he brought it to school to assist with notetaking and reviewing the lectures later on at home.  (This, by the way, is precisely one of the ways that the LiveScribe pen is SO AWESOME.  This is EXACTLY in line with best practices).

The teacher, however, told him he couldn't use it because it was "illegal".  Now, there is one potential legal issue at hand.  Some states prohibit you from recording conversations without the other party's consent (these are "two party" states).  Other states have no such restriction, and you can record away (these are "one party" states).  Apparently, this kid was in a one-party state, so the teacher was flat wrong. I love how people make these things up. 

Now, turn your legal brain on to the next logical question: would use of the LiveScribe pen be illegal in a two party state?  After all, you'd need the other party's consent to record.  Well, really, what thinking teacher would refuse consent to the student's recording?  What about the other students - would schools need to get consent from each and every student, if one student wanted to record a lecture (in which the other students are presumably participating)?  I would argue no.  Students don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy in what they say in a classroom, vis a vis the other people in the class.  Now, maybe you'd want the student doing the recording to agree to only use the recording for educational purposes, and that seems reasonable.  But again, nothing about the use of the LiveScribe pen is illegal.

So, back to the example.  What was the teacher's real concern?  Well, maybe the teacher was nervous that if the kid recorded her lectures, his parents would find that that she really couldn't teach!  Or maybe the teacher just didn't understand the potential of the LiveScribe pen to really help the student learn.  I really have no idea, but this really reinforces the principles I posted about earlier.  In sum, the coolest and best technologies for learning will be entirely useless if teachers don't know how to use them and if schools don't support their inclusion in the classroom.

What's the value of an online education?

 Happy return to the school year!  After a little summer break, we are back in action.  And, talking about education again.

I've talked about online education before - I generally think it presents some interesting new options, but it's fairly untested.  And you certainly know I'm not anti-technology or anti-choice.  So I read with interest a set of surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center.  One survey was a telephone survey to 2,000+ random adults (the "public") and the other was a online survey to over 1,000 college presidents (2 and 4 year, private and public).  You can find the link to the study here - but here are some interesting highlights:

1. The general public doesn't value online learning very highly.  Only 29% of the public says online courses offer an equal value compared with courses taken in a classroom. Half (51%) of the college presidents surveyed say online courses provide the same value.  What's the difference?  Perception.  A Harvard education is viewed to be superior to most other undergraduate colleges - but it's not necessarily true.  It might be the best for some students, but other students might do better in a college with smaller class sizes and a different choice of majors.  But Harvard remains "on the top" because of perception.  The issue of perception arises after you've graduated, when you're trying to get a job on the basis of your academics.  Online education is new, and mostly unproven.  It will need to prove that it's not a fluffy option for people trying to do minimal work. 

2. ....and yet,  Roughly one-in-four college graduates (23%) report that they have taken a class online. Not surprisingly, the share doubles to 46% among those who have graduated in the past ten years (I mean, really, 10 years ago there wasn't even Google). Among all adults who have taken a class online, 39% say the format’s educational value is equal to that of a course taken in a classroom.  But on this point, how would they know?  I would argue that the value depends on the course and the curriculum - is it a topic that can be easily (or best?) taught online?  Compare a law school lecture - where minimal student input is expected or required - with a class on teaching methods, where presumably you need to try your methods out on other students.

3.  Despite recent evidence to the contrary, digital textbooks may well conquer.  Nearly two-thirds of college presidents (62%) anticipate that 10 years from now, more than half of the textbooks used by their undergraduate students will be entirely digital.  I believe this.  Tablet computing is taking over, and it's replacing the 15 pounds of textbooks I carried in high school.

There are some other interesting factoids, like, how plagiarism is on the rise due to the Internet.  I find this fascinating - this was simply not an option when I was in high school.  Perhaps we'll explore this issue in a future post, because I think this is definitely a downside to technology, and I'd like to research what teachers and schools are doing to combat the problem.  (Part of the solution might be to flip the classroom a la the Khan Academy - do lectures at home and homework at school).  Another interesting point is that colleges have yet to figure out how to regulate the use of smartphones, tablets, and laptops in the classroom.  Do you permit wireless?  Do you require wireless?  How do you keep students engaged if they can access Angry Birds at any time?

Worth some thinking!

How to Integrate Technology in the Classroom

Let's get back to the technology people!  I encountered this fabulous list of ideas of how to effectively integrate technology into the classroom.  The author, Adam Bellow, is an advocate for technology in education, and his website ( http://edutecher.net/ ) promotes new and effective technologies.  He recently wrote a post on Mind/Shift, itself an interesting website on education, policy, and technology.  You can see his full post on Mind/Shift, but here are his 7 Golden Rules for Using Technology in Schools:

1.  Don't trap technology in a room.  Remember "the computer lab"?  As Bellow says, technology should be like oxygen - ubiquitous, necessary, and invisible.

2.  Technology is worthless without professional development.  It's more than just "how-to".  It's "why" and "why this is worth your time".

3.  Mobile technology stretches a long way.  So why are cellphones banned from most classrooms?  Why not harass the power of smartphones and apps for the sake of learning (not just texting)?

4.  The new "F word" is fear.  Schools block access to websites, teachers are afraid that kids know more about technology than they do.  So perhaps it's our responsibility to teach kids how to use technology responsibly - to know about copyright laws and licenses, for one thing - and how to be good "digital citizens", as Bellow puts it.



5.  Tech tools are not just a passing fad.  Sorry folks, smartphones and tablets are here to stay.  And given how inexpensive some of these tools are (the iPod Touch, LiveScribe pen, etc.) and the countless uses they have, it's worth investing, and training people NOW.

6.  Money is not the problem.  See Khan Academy.


7. Invite every stakeholder to the conversation.  And yes, that includes students too.  Heck, throw in parents!

No Child Left Behind: 101

This is another post providing some background on education laws, so that I can discuss some very recent developments.

So, No Child Left Behind is widely viewed to have been originally enacted by Bush II in 2002.  The basic idea was to create standards-based accountability for K-12 nationwide.  The act mandated student testing every year from 3rd to 8th grade, and once in high school, to measure student progress.  Each year, a certain percentage of a state's schools must make annual yearly progress (AYP).  AYP means that this year's 5th graders, for example, test better than last year's fifth graders.  If a school doesn't make AYP, it is labeled "needs improvement"

The schedule of progress was defined as well - by the 2013-2014, all schools, in all states, are to be at "proficient" level.  If a school doesn't, then that school faces an escalating set of sanctions - tutoring, offering students school choice, etc. (each of which costs the states money) - and also puts federal funding at risk.

A couple of points about all that: First, NCLB was simply a reauthorization of an existing law - the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which was first enacted in 1965 (So sometimes, you'll see NCLB referred to as ESEA.  Another example of ed law alphabet soup).  So, it wasn't something that Bush II just created out of thin air.

Update! Douglas County Voucher Program Halted!

I've lost the "breaking news" aspect of this, since it happened last Friday, BUT a Denver district court judge issued an injunction to stop the implementation of the Douglas County voucher program.  I think this is the correct result, based on the legal arguments. Interestingly, even though the plaintiffs only asked for a preliminary injunction (meaning, a temporary halt to the program while its legal implications were sorted out), the judge issued a permanent injunction.  That means that the program is over, unless Douglas County decides to appeal.

Here's a link to the judge's ruling (pretty much a home run for the plaintiffs).  I don't expect you to read it because it's 68 pages, but it's a thorough explanation of why this program violates the Colorado state constitution.  And it also includes some fascinating details about some of the actions taken by the private schools - like how one school reduced the financial aid package for a student in the exact amount of the voucher.  How nice.  How helpful to lower-income families.

And here's some information about the implications of the decision from EdNewsColorado, a great website about educational issues, but it is focused primarily on Colorado. Since it's so close to the start of the school year, a number of families already planned to use the vouchers to attend the private schools.  So, what those families will now do is murky.

Congrats to the ACLU, but really, I still think the better argument lies with the Legal Center.

School Vouchers: the Discrimination Problem

This is Part III of my attempt to catch folks up on the pluses and minuses of school voucher programs, especially as they impact minorities and kids with disabilities.  As I've mentioned, there's a new school voucher program here in Colorado (in Douglas County).  The school district, obviously, thinks this is a good idea.

Again, the ACLU does not agree.  See earlier discussion here.

Plus, as discussed in this WSJ article about the voucher program, this looks like the classic case of vouchers "skimming off the top" - since the vouchers won't actually cover the entire cost of the typical private school, low income families really can't take advantage of them.  In essence, it looks like the vouches are subsidies to middle and upper class families, who can now leave public schools in favor of something they think is better.

Now, some states have actively tried to address concerns with school voucher programs by offering additional assistance to low-income families, and ancillary supports (like transportation).  Some have even enacted scholarship programs (another way to describe school vouchers) for kids with disabilities - Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, Utah, and Florida, just to name a few.  (The 12 year old Florida McKay Scholarship, a leader in this movement, will be the subject of another post). This is a great development (check out this interesting piece in the NY Times.)

But, not so in this case here in Colorado!

More on School Vouchers: the Religion Red Herring

As promised/threatened, there's a lot more to say about private school vouchers and whether or not state methods of implementing them work for students with special needs.

Just some quick background: school vouchers permit students to basically go to private schools on "scholarship", using public funds designated for each child's education.  The public school district pays the private school an allocation of funds per student enrolled via voucher, usually dependent on a formula concocted by dividing the number of enrolled public school students into the general education fund.

A lot of folks like the idea because it promotes competition between public and private schools, and provides choices and opportunities to kids who might not have very many options.  If you think about the problems of underperforming public schools in poor, urban areas, vouchers could allow kids in such areas (often, minorities) to access better education.  There's been quite a bit of research in this area, much of which supports the idea that competition breeds improvement, and better educational choices for underprivileged kids.  (See, for example, the wikipedia on school vouchers, which is actually very good and fairly balanced.)

Now, a lot of folks do not like school vouchers because they do muddle the line between public and private schools. And these folks have their own research arguing that vouchers lead to a lack of accountability, and not necessarily even improvement in test scores.  Furthermore, when the private schools are also religious schools, questions arise about whether public funds ought to be spent on religious education (the whole minor issue of separation of church and state, you know). 

Digital Textbooks Round II - Not what they're cracked up to be?

You know that I'm impressed by schools using iPads in the classroom, and hopeful about the potential of e-textbooks to radically change the delivery of educational content.  But lately, I've been reading a string of articles that are pointing out some of the real challenges to actual adoption of e-textbooks in our classrooms.  And it's worth considering some of these issues - better now than later.

Online Education - An Introduction

I've been following the growth of online education for awhile.  As you (faithful readers of my blog) well know, I definitely support the use of technology in the classroom to support varied learning styles and varied levels of development.  But online education has been a mystery to me.  On the one hand, it seems like the ultimate in individualized education.  But on the other hand, isn't some kind of general education, in a general classroom, with peers, the whole point of public education in the United States, and the entire idea behind IDEA?? (forgive the pun!)

Let's discuss. 

Does your child have dyslexia? Teach him Japanese!

I just read an article in the WSJ on this fascinating topic called Unlocking Dyslexia in Japanese.  In case you can't read it (I know it's subscription only), here's the gist:

A mom noticed that her 12-year old son, who had spent the past two years at a specialized school for kids with learning disabilities, was excelling in one class in particular at his new, mainstream school - Japanese.  Even though he could barely write legible English words, his Japanese characters were sharp and distinct.

Researchers have hypothesized that Japanese and Chinese - both languages where single characters represent entire words or ideas - may be easier for kids with dyslexia to learn.  Kids with dyslexia tend to think visually, and to rely on memorization to get through reading challenges - both skills that serve them well in decoding Japanese and Chinese.  Now, there's no getting around the fact that English-speaking kids with dyslexia are going to need to learn to read in English.  But teachers and developers of curriculum could design reading and writing programs to help develop methodologies that are more effective - working on repetition, memorization, pattern recognition, etc.

I love this story for several reasons.  First, I love that his mom didn't give up on him.  Yes, he was having difficulties in school, but she didn't assume that was irreversible, or somehow his fault.  She kept trying different ideas, and kept believing in him.  Second, the fact that a child with dyslexia may have an advantage in learning Japanese or Chinese characters is just yet another example of how we need to support a variety of brains!  Our kids learn differently because their brains are literally wired differently.  Let's support them, not try to change them.  Third, I'm fascinated by this school that offers instruction in Japanese.  Maybe instead of teaching kids French or Spanish (French being really only useful in restaurants, sorry Parisians), we should be focusing on Japanese or Mandarin Chinese.

And perhaps most importantly, this story shows just how far we have yet to go in understanding neuropsych disorders like dyslexia.  We need more research dollars, we need more creative thinking, and we need to raise awareness that these kids have amazing untapped potential.

The Montessori Method for Special Needs Kids

From my posts lately, you might be justified in assuming that I think technology will solve every ill in our educational system.  Just to clarify: I don't think it will.  New technologies like e-readers, and the iPad, and the LiveScribe pen *could* change the classroom model, support inclusion and diverse learning styles, and drive a universal design for learning (UDL) approach.  But it will require flexible thinking and a willingness to change the status quo, support from school administrators, and changes to teacher training, both for teachers already on the job and those obtaining their education degrees.

Even without the latest gadgets and toys, however, classrooms can embrace the principles of UDL using a time-honored, well-researched approach - the Montessori Method.  One could almost consider Maria Montessori to be the earliest UDL proponent.  She was an educator, an advocate, and a researcher in children's education, primarily in Italy in the early part of the 20th century.

There are some great on-line resources that explain the Montessori method, which you can check out here and here.  (Which I would recommend you do, because I am not Montessori trained and certainly don't want to misrepresent the program).  Basically, the core idea is respect for the individual child, and her interests, pace of development, and ability to succeed.  A Montessori classroom is organized at the child's level, with appropriately sized worktables and tools (like sinks), and is designed to be a calm, home-like environment.  Montessori materials (or "work") are designed to engage all the senses.  Research has shown that kids who attend Montessori preschools are better prepared, and possibly even ahead of their peers in reading and math skills, for elementary school.

For kids with special needs, though, I think the Montessori approach has particular power.  Here's a non-exhaustive list of attributes of the approach that I think are great for such children:

LiveScribe! The Greatest Learning Tool since the Protractor!!

I stole that line from the presenter at the assistive technology conference I went to last week.  But it is TRUE!  And you know how much I love the iPad, so the LiveScribe pen has a lot to live up to.

Ok, here's the link to the website for LiveScribe, which provides some visuals and details about what the pen actually is.  Think of it as a smartpen, like your iPhone is a smartphone.  It really is a pen, with ink, used on paper - but it's also a mini computer, with incredible functionality.  When you use the pen on the LiveScribe paper and press the "record" icon on the paper, the pen starts recording the audio and tracks it to the notes you're taking.  Later, you can tap any of your notes and the audio that was recorded at the time you made that note will start playing.  You can also sync the pen with your desktop, and save the notes and audio on the computer.  And THEN you can email it, share it on Facebook, create a PDF of the notes.....pretty remarkable.

Its initial intended use was probably the high school/college student taking lecture classes and writing down copious notes.  Having the playback feature would be helpful to any highschooler, but probably critically helpful to kids who have trouble taking notes and listening to lectures at the same time (e.g., kids with executive function issues, or auditory processing disorders, etc.).  One could envision a peer notetaker using the device in class, and then giving his notes and pen to the student with special needs.  What a great device to support inclusion in the classroom!

What I find *really* exciting, though, are the potential uses of the pen for kids in preschool and elementary school.  They're not taking notes during a lecture - but they are learning to read and spell.  For this age group, the pen seems most effective in the hands of the teacher or therapist. You know how preschools and kindergarten walls are covered in words and maps?  Well, the teacher can draw dots on the LiveScribe paper, cut the paper dots out, and paste them next to each word, or perhaps on a location on a map.  The teacher can then "load" the dot with relevant audio - perhaps just saying the word, perhaps providing the definition of the word.  Later, with the pen (that created the dots), a student can tap the dot and hear the audio.

I mean, whoa!  This whole dot thing has SO many possibilities.  You can make ANY book an audio book, simply by pasting in a dot and loading it with audio of the words on that page.  A SLP could make an articulation worksheet, have the child practice drills, and then review the audio later.  Another use is that a child's speech support team at school could record the child's articulation, and then provide the data to the parents that night.  (Think of the disputes that could be avoided, if everyone is accessing the same objective data!)

Then you have the possibility of the teacher creating "pencasts".  Here, a math teacher, say, would use the pen and paper and record a lesson.  Then, she could upload the notes and audio, and provide the link to her students.  This could be used in a flipped-classroom model (like the Khan Academy, where the lectures are the "homework" and problem sets are done in the classroom), or, as extra support on topics that multiple kids find challenging.

The potential cost savings to school districts is remarkable.  The pen comes in three different models, with different levels of memory (kind of like the iPad), and the prices ranges from $99-$199.  The paper is $20 for a pack of 4 notebooks, which isn't bad, especially if you think about how many dots you can draw on a single page. 

And the sheer number of technologies that the LiveScribe system can replace is astonishing.  The pen, paper, and a document camera can be used to replace overhead projectors and Smart Boards (which cost thousands of dollars.)  Second, as I've mentioned before, a LiveScribe pen can replace adult notetakers assigned to support a specific child.  Third, there's really no need for special software/computers to make tests accessible to kids with motor difficulties - teachers can create accessible tests in 2 minutes using the LiveScribe pen.

I think this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to how this pen can be used to support kids - both typical and special needs - in the classroom and enable their academic success.  And I'd love to hear other ways that people are using the LiveScribe pen creatively, either in the classroom or otherwise. 

And no, I didn't get a free LiveScribe pen for writing this.  Sigh.  But I would gladly, gladly take one.

Accessibility of Digital Educational Materials

So, in case you didn't know, the U.S. Department of Education has a Office for Civil Rights (OCR) that's responsible for, among other things, enforcing the ADA (as it applies to public schools) and the IDEA (the special education law).

Last week, the OCR issued some policy guidance on the matter of digital educational materials.  They first tackled this issue in June 2010, when the OCR issued what they call a "Dear Colleague Letter" (a "DCL", and no, I have no idea where they came up with that naming system) on the issue of postsecondary institutions using e-books.  Last week's DCL basically updated the June 2010 policy guidance and clarified that the same principles apply to elementary and secondary schools.

What's the concern?  Well, with the increase in use of e-books - and technology in the classroom more generally - the OCR is reminding schools at all levels that they "must ensure equal access to the educational benefits and opportunities afforded by the technology and equal treatment in the use of the technology for all students, including students with disabilities".  If teachers are using an online software program to track homework assignments, or assigning reading in e-books in lieu of paper textbooks, then these technologies need to accessible to all students, even those who may have learning disabilities, vision impairments, or anything else.  It really shouldn't be surprising - this is basic non-discrimination under the ADA, and isn't new law. 

1 in 6

The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has just released results from a study that examined rates of disability in children ages 3-17, over a 12 year period from 1997-2008.  (You can read the whole report online here, but you'll have to buy a subscription to Pediatrics: CDC Report in Pediatrics).  Here's the high level summary:

• Between 1997 and 2008, the number of children with a disability rose from 8.2 million to roughly 10 million, or from less than 13% to more than 15% of all kids between the ages of 3 and 17. 
• The disabilities included in these numbers include autism, ADHD, learning disabilities, cerebral palsy, seizures, stuttering or stammering, hearing loss, blindness, or intellectual disability (formerly known as mental retardation).
• Nearly twice as many boys as girls had a disability.

That's higher than you thought, right? We're talking about significant numbers of kids in our school systems who need help in accessing their education.  I can tell you, though, that budgets for special education services - or for general education, for that matter - have not increased to keep up with these trends.

School Budget Officers, this one's for you

I've been reading my county's school budget document - insert joke about how I must have time on my hands - and it's not pretty.  Because of the recession, our school district is facing a declining budget for the third year in a row.  I imagine most school districts across the country are facing the same issues, especially as the Obama stimulus money runs out, and administrators will make some tough choices that could be detrimental to our kids.

So.  Let's be proactive, and think about how we can use technology and the principles of universal design for learning to cut costs without cutting quality.

Apps for Kids: Do they really teach anything?

I've posted a fair amount about how schools can use technology like the iPad to provide services and curriculum support to kids.  Tablet computers will likely replace paper textbooks at some point - and it's really easy to see that coming for graduate schools (maybe even colleges). But, one commentator rightly asked "are these things really suitable for elementary school kids?"  Good question: after all, one of Siobhan's therapists is adamant that we *not* use the iPad as her AAC because of the potential for breakage.

We've seen how young kids - even as young as 3 years old - have an amazingly intuitive ability to use tablet computers to play games and watch videos.  But is there really any learning value?

Back to Basics: Special Education

Given some topics that I want to address, I thought it'd be useful to provide a high-level summary of some of the basics of special education.  It has a lingo of its own, and it's useful to know common concepts and acronyms to navigate in this world.

First of all, special education is governed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which was first passed in 1975.  It came about in the wake of the Brown v. Board of Education decision by the Supreme Court, which held, in 1954, that all children were entitled to education - that separate was inherently not equal.  IDEA is thus a civil rights statute, but is also a funding statute that provides funds to states in exchange for the states' commitment to certain minimum standards for special education programs.  (Note that IDEA is not, and has never been, fully funded.  It is currently funded at about 12% of its allocation).

Ok, so, who knows what special education *is not*?

e-Textbook Market Scaling Up

Do you remember lugging around a 15 pound backpack in middle school - with just half of your day's textbooks?  Those textbooks were heavy.  About the only thing I'd miss going through that with my kids is the ritual wrapping of the textbooks in old paper grocery bags.  (Do kids still do this?  It must be hard, given the scarcity of brown paper grocery bags).

Anyway, that's not likely to be an issue for much longer because e-textbooks are on the move.  There have been a number of recent newsarticles describing the trends in the educational book industry, and the signs are all pointing one way: the decline of traditional textbooks.

The Eggshell Child, or, "Are you Disabled Enough?"

As I explained earlier in Cloud Computing and Disabilities, disabilities are part of the spectrum of being human.  As the medical understanding of disability as changed, federal regulations have evolved to reflect this understanding as well. In fact, the IDEA 2004 recognizes that "Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to participate in or contribute to society.  Improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy ofensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities." 

The problem - and it's built into the same IDEA regulations -  is that special ed services are available only to those kids who fit into one of about a dozen boxes (e.g., specific learning disability, visual impairment, other health impairment, etc.)  On top of that, many school districts require there to be a significant discrepancy between the child's intelligence and academic performance to even offer the child services.  In some cases, this might mean that your child needs to be 2 standard deviations away from the norm on an assessment test. It's not enough to say that your child is struggling with reading; your child needs to be struggling with reading AND is performing at, say, the 16th percentile.