• Supreme Court Addresses Parental Rights in IDEA
• U.S. Chamber of Commerce Issues State-by-State Report on Educational Effectiveness

Supreme Court Addresses Parental Rights in IDEA
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Winkelman v. Parma City School District to determine if parents can represent themselves and/or their children as a non-lawyers –pro se – in Federal court under IDEA. The case also touches on a larger question of whether IDEA provides rights to both children and parents beyond due process.

In court, non-lawyer individuals are not allowed to represent others, including family members. While IDEA does allow a parent to represent his or her child in administrative hearings, the law is silent as to whether a non-lawyer parent can represent his or her child in Court.

During the oral arguments, whereby Supreme Court Justices have the opportunity to engage in a question and answer session with lawyers, the Justices asked questions focusing on a variety of issues. Justice Scalia emphasized that under IDEA the education is guaranteed to the child, and not parents. Chief Justice Roberts addressed the statute’s provisions that parents may be “parties aggrieved” only with respect to reimbursement and procedural rights. Additionally, Justice Scalia commented that allowing parents to act as lawyers would “make a lot more work for Federal district judges” and could allow for the possibility of frivolous lawsuits. Justice Alito addressed the issue of “emotional attachment” and if a parent would be able to represent their child effectively.

This case originated when the parents of Jacob Winkelman, a nine-year-old with autism, challenged their school district’s proposed IEP for Jacob. After going through the due process system, the Winkelmans filed suit in a federal court seeking reimbursement for the costs of enrolling Jacob at a private school. The Court ruled in favor of the school district and subsequently the Winkelmans filed a pro se appeal. The Sixth Circuit dismissed the appeal as non-attorney parents are prohibited from proceeding pro se.

The Court is expected to deliver a decision in June or July 2007. CEC will continue to provide information on this case as it unfolds in future Policy Updates.

Read the transcript of the oral arguments.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Issues State-by-State Report on Educational Effectiveness
In recognition of growing global competition and new challenges concerning social and economic changes, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued a state-by-state report on academic achievement on Thursday.

The Chamber’s report, titled Leaders and Laggers: A State-by-State Report Card on Educational Effectiveness, had the goal of grading all 50 states and Washington, DC, on their K-12 school systems in order to identify both leaders and laggards in the tough business of school performance.

Major findings of the report include:

• Return on investment varies greatly across states. States like Utah and North Carolina appear to spend their education dollars far more efficiently than many of their peers, posting twice the rate of return on their education investments. Other states show disappointing academic results given their spending levels, even after accounting for student poverty, cost of living, and the number of pupils with special needs.
• Certain states with a large percentage of low-income and minority students score far better than others on achievement tests. Those seeking to improve their own students' academic results should look to high-achieving states with large percentages of traditionally low-scoring demographic groups, such as Florida, Kansas, Texas, and Virginia, to figure out how to succeed with low-income and minority students. Although some states like Wyoming may seem relatively homogenous they do in fact, have significant populations of low-income students and some minority students. Because they are serving those students relatively well, they earned As in this category.
• States could do much more to ensure a 21st century teaching workforce. Almost all the states have basic skills tests and subject knowledge exams in place for new teachers. However, there are no clear data on what states are doing to evaluate teacher performance, reward good teachers, make it easier for talented candidates to compete for jobs, or remove ineffective educators.
• Truth in advertising is inconsistent. Many states systematically paint a much rosier picture of how their schools are doing than is actually the case. This makes it tough for parents, voters, or business leaders to hold public officials and educators accountable. Alabama, for instance, reported in 2005 that 83% of its 4th graders were proficient in reading on its state test—seemingly making it one of the nation's highest-performing states. But according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 22% of Alabama's 4th graders scored at or above the proficient level on reading, making it one of the nation's poorest performing states.
• State standards are too often inadequate. Many states have done a mediocre job of establishing rigorous standards in key subject areas. Without clearer, rigorous guidelines about what students need to know, states will have a hard time measuring achievement and holding students and schools accountable for performance.
• Forward-looking states are fostering innovation. While progress is uneven, states such as Arizona and Colorado have moved aggressively to promote comprehensive charter school legislation and enable virtual schooling, thus helping establish the infrastructure for 21st century educational reinvention.
• High school graduation rates and college preparation levels are much higher in some states than others. Some states are successfully preparing students for college and the workforce, while others are falling short. Those that are not making the grade should look to states such as New Jersey, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Illinois, which lead the nation in ensuring that students graduate from high school in four years, pass challenging Advanced Placement (AP) exams in core subject areas, and go on to enroll in college.
• States have begun to improve data collection efforts. Despite widespread problems with securing adequate data, there are signs of improvement; forty-five states now use a unique statewide student identifier to track students over time and across campuses.
  
  Read the full report.