Last week, U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, announced that the Department of Education  will not continue to support the implementation of an alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS) – known as the “2% rule” for students with disabilities . This policy was initially announced in 2005 and formalized by ESEA regulation in 2007.

This is important to the National Center for Learning Disabilities because under the 2% rule, states have been allowed to develop an alternate assessment specifically for a subset of students with disabilities — roughly 20% of all students with disabilities.  This assessment is in addition to the alternate assessment on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) which is designed for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities.  (For more background on the 2% rule, read “The Two-Percent Rule: A Misunderstood Policy with the Potential to Harm Millions of Kids.”

NCLD has publicly objected to the 2% rule since it was first announced by the Department back in 2005. In late 2010 we commissioned a study (unpublished) of the 2% policy in several states and we are even further convinced that it needs to be discontinued. Our objection is based on several critical points:

• The research basis to support the new policy did not include a statistically reliable number of students with disabilities; however, the policy targets only these students.  Therefore, too little was known about how to identify and determine which students should be taking the modified test.
• Student performance data from several states has shown that the students failing state assessments in reading and math for many consecutive years are not exclusively students with disabilities. In fact, students who are poor and from minority groups account for a large portion of failing students. Yet the 2% rule allows only students with disabilities to take the AA-MAS.
• Many of the AA-MAS developed by states provide accommodations that are not allowed on the state general assessment. Instead of shifting students out of the general assessment, very restrictive accommodations policies should be reviewed and revised to provide the widest range of test accommodations.
• The provision of an interim policy — sometimes called a “proxy” — allowed schools and districts in states that were working to develop the AA-MAS to count some students with disabilities who failed the general state assessment as “proficient” for school/district accountability purpose. While limited to certain states — and could only be applied where schools failed to meet accountability requirements for students with disabilities — this interim policy was in effect for 5 years and expired in 2009. During that time, several states used this proxy but did NOT develop the AA-MAS. Some states pressured the Department of Education to extend the interim policy.

In his announcement, Secretary Duncan signaled the Department of Education’s intention to abandon use of the AA-MAS altogether once new assessments are available, no later than the 2014–2015 school year. (These new assessments are currently being developed by two large consortia of states under a part of the Race to the Top program.) States with an approved 2% test already in place — which is just a handful of states — will be allowed to continue using them until the new assessments are available. And, the interim proxy policy will not be extended. NCLD is pleased that the Department of Education has taken these positions on the 2% rule! We will continue to advocate for policies that require all students with learning disabilities to participate in general state assessments, with accommodations as needed.   Every student with a learning disability should have every opportunity to achieve graduating from high school with a regular diploma with their peers.  Read Duncan’s speech.