reply to:                                                                                                                            Main office:
515 Washington Street                                                                                                    1875 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
3^rd floor                                                                                                                           Washington, D.C. 20009
Boston, MA 02111                                                                                                          (202) 986-3000 
(617) 451-0855                                                                                                                (202) 986-6648 fax
(617) 451-0857 fax       

May 30, 2000



The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy
United States Senate
315 Russell Building
1^st & C Streets, NE
Washington, D.C. 20510

The Honorable Tom Harkin
731 Hart Building
2^nd & C Streets, NE
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Kennedy and Senator Harkin:

On behalf of students with disabilities, including those who may have behavioral manifestations, the Center for Law and Education of Boston and Washington, D.C. urges you to continue to support the "no cessation" of education principle originally adopted by Public Law 94-142 in1975, and more recently incorporated at 20 U.S.C. §1412(a)(1) in the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments in 1997.  This core principle of P.L. 94-142 must not be compromised, but protected and preserved.  Reaffirmed by bipartisan agreement following an especially contentious reauthorization process, it is essential to all efforts to move forward with the promise of full implementation of the 1975 Act, as reaffirmed by the Amendments of 1997, ensuring full participation in the general education curriculum to the maximum extent appropriate for all students with disabilities.

We are most appreciative of your continued efforts to improve the quality of education for all children, and especially those from low-income families, who are educationally disadvantaged, have limited English proficiency or disabilities.  While we support the intent of the Gun Free Schools Act and applaud efforts to protect children and youth by controlling access to firearms, we reject the notion that "zero tolerance" for firearms and dangerous weapons should ever translate into "zero education" for any child or youth.

While CLE urges you to oppose the Ashcroft Amendment to S.2 and any other similar attempts to amend IDEA - whether through S. 254, the pending Juvenile Justice bill or new legislation, specifically, we ask that there be no compromise in the face of such amendments.   There is no room for compromise on this matter, for any compromise will eliminate the "no cessation" provision of the IDEA.  This is a matter of basic civil rights and the preservation of the most revered principle of P.L. 94-142 now in its most recent iteration, the IDEA Amendments of 1997. 

The IDEA Amendments, which evolved through your leadership and as a result of a laudable bipartisan commitment to full participation, and the subsequently promulgated regulations, provide new tools for ensuring students with disabilities high quality education.  Today educators, parents and advocates must be given the chance to utilize these tools effectively to help improve educational achievement for students, who for too long have been denied the opportunity to learn what all other students are expected to know and be able to do.  It is not a coincidence that efforts to undermine the statutory protection - the core principle of "no cessation" of education - occur as students with disabilities for the first time have been given a real opportunity to implement the right to participate fully in the general education curriculum - a right denied and delayed for 25 years - at least, in part, because of lack of vision, ignorance and bigotry.   

The efforts of those who disingenuously purport to challenge the "double standard" that mandates continued provision of free appropriate public education for students with disabilities who are removed from school for weapons or drugs would be better directed at ensuring that all students continue to be educated during the period of their exclusion from school. We will challenge directly and indirectly the incessant efforts of those few individuals, who despite the bipartisan commitment to implementing the key principles of IDEA, persist in engaging in outlier activities designed to deny students with disabilities their basic civil rights and to undermine efforts to include them in the benefits of school reform.

For too long despite the original commitment of P.L. 94-142, students with disabilities have been denied the opportunity to learn what other students are expected to know and be able to do.  Despite research attesting to 'state of the art' knowledge and 'best practices' for effective teaching and learning, educators are still not provided adequate professional development to enable them to incorporate such research based practices that  would improve the educational achievement of their students with disabilities.  The IDEA Amendments of 1997 clarify that students with disabilities have a right to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) consisting of  an appropriate elementary or secondary education that meets state standards, with such specialized instruction and related or supplementary services needed to allow them to be educated in the regular classroom with their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent  appropriate consistent with their individual needs. 

For students with behavioral manifestations - i.e., those students for whom the original P.L. 94-142 was primarily intended to provide hope and redress - the Amendments clarify that FAPE includes educational and related services necessary to address effectively behavior and its underlying problems.  Indeed, the IDEA Amendments of 1997 underscore as one critical aspect of schools' duty to address behavior that impedes a child's learning or that of others, that the IEP team "consider, when appropriate, strategies, including positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and supports to address that behavior."  20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(3)(B).  Thus, this provision makes clear that the Act contemplates schools providing the behavioral supports necessary to sustain in-school learning as part of the basic duty to provide FAPE, "special education", and "related services."  After disciplinary actions, the Act, as amended at 20 U.S.C. 1415(k)(1)(B), also requires a functional behavior assessment and implementation or revision of a behavioral intervention plan.  Also, when a student is placed in an 'interim alternative educational setting' following an incident involving dangerous weapons or drugs, or upon a finding by a hearing officer that maintaining a child in his or her current placement is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or others, services must be provided to address the behavior that triggered the placement change. 20 U.S.C. 1415(k)(3).


The new focus on treating behavior as an education issue is evident as functional behavioral assessments are conducted, behavioral intervention plans developed, and effective instructional strategies and interventions shared among the network of teachers,  service providers, and parents.  Please permit the IDEA with its new provisions to be implemented and enforced consistent with its underlying core principles.

Thank you for your consideration and your attention to this matter.  Please feel free to call me in the Boston office if you have any concerns.

        Yours truly,



        Kathleen B. Boundy
        Co-Director