[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 223 (Monday, November 21, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-28582]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: November 21, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________




Research in Education of Individuals With Disabilities Program; Notice 
Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 1995; Notices
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

 
Research in Education of Individuals With Disabilities Program

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of Final Priorities.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Secretary announces final priorities for the Research in 
Education of Individuals with Disabilities Program. The Secretary may 
use these priorities in Fiscal Year 1995 and subsequent years. The 
Secretary takes this action to focus Federal assistance on identified 
needs to improve outcomes for children with disabilities. The final 
priorities are intended to ensure wide and effective use of program 
funds.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect on December 21, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The name, address, and telephone 
number of the person at the Department to contact for information on 
each specific priority is listed under that priority.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Research in Education of Individuals 
with Disabilities Program, authorized by Part E of the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1441-1443), provides support: (1) 
To advance and improve the knowledge base and improve the practice of 
professionals, parents, and others providing early intervention, 
special education, and related services--including professionals in 
regular education environments--to provide children with disabilities 
effective instruction and enable them to successfully learn; and (2) 
for research and related purposes, surveys or demonstrations relating 
to physical education or recreation, including therapeutic recreation, 
for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
    On August 1, 1994, the Secretary published a notice of proposed 
priorities for this program in the Federal Register (59 FR 39232-
39234).
    These final priorities support the National Education Goals by 
improving understanding of how to enable children and youth with 
disabilities to reach higher levels of academic achievement.
    The publication of these priorities does not preclude the Secretary 
from proposing additional priorities, nor does it limit the Secretary 
to funding only these priorities, subject to meeting applicable 
rulemaking requirements. Funding of particular projects depends on the 
availability of funds, and the quality of the applications received. 
Further, FY 1995 priorities could be affected by enactment of 
legislation reauthorizing these programs.

    Note: This notice of final priorities does not solicit 
applications. A notice inviting applications under these 
competitions is published in a separate notice in this issue of the 
Federal Register.

Analysis of Comments and Changes

    In response to the Secretary's invitation in the notice of proposed 
priorities, six parties submitted comments. An analysis of the comments 
and of the changes in the proposed priorities follows. Technical and 
other minor changes--as well as suggested changes the Secretary is not 
legally authorized to make under the applicable statutory authority--
are not addressed.

Priority--Examining Alternatives for Outcome Assessment for Children 
With Disabilities

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the development of new 
assessment instruments should be accompanied by checks for reliability 
and validity.
    Discussion: The purpose of the priority is to support research 
projects, not instrument development. The Secretary believes that the 
priority as written allows applicants to address technical 
characteristics such as reliability and validity among the possible 
research issues to be studied.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that old definitions of 
technical adequacy might be inappropriate for alternative forms of 
assessment.
    Discussion: The priority as written does not specify what technical 
criteria should be applied to alternative assessments, but raises this 
question as one possible research issue. The Secretary prefers that 
applicants be given flexibility to propose the technical criteria to be 
applied to alternative assessments.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that Issue 4 ``Including students 
with disabilities in general assessments'' be expanded to include other 
forms of diversity such as cultural and racial backgrounds.
    Discussion: As written, the priority's focus on students with 
disabilities is consistent with the authorizing statute. Applicants may 
add other forms of diversity to this focus as appropriate for their 
particular research issues.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that encouragement be given to 
collaboration of State and local educational agencies and universities.
    Discussion: The organizations specified by the commenter are all 
eligible applicants under this program. Collaboration may or may not be 
appropriate for the type of research proposed. Applicants may develop 
collaborative arrangements as appropriate for their proposed program of 
research.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the research issues listed in 
the priority be expanded to include issues focused specifically on 
accountability and issues related to professional skill and knowledge. 
Another commenter suggested that the list be expanded to include the 
issue of comparability of measures across different patterns of age, 
race, ethnicity, language, and migration status.
    Discussion: The priority as written supports research on issues 
related to ``outcome assessment and/or outcomes-based accountability 
for students with disabilities'' that ``include, but are not limited 
to'' the issues listed in the priority. The list is intended to be 
illustrative and not exhaustive, and to include a range of assessment 
and accountability issues without being excessively complex and 
prescriptive. Applicants may certainly address important research 
issues which are not included on this list.
    Changes: None.

Priority--Studying Models That Bridge the Gap Between Research and 
Practice

    Comment: One commenter suggested that applicants should not be 
limited to the specific models mentioned in the background section and 
should be allowed to add or create models.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that applicants should be allowed 
to add or create models. The models mentioned in the background section 
were meant only to serve as examples of the range of models. Applicants 
may study other existing models, such as teacher networking models, or 
use models they have created.
    Changes: The Secretary has clarified the priority by revising the 
first two paragraphs under the ``Priority'' section so as to give 
applicants the option of creating models.
    Comment: One commenter cited the priority as extremely important in 
making the final step between research findings and practice if 
research is to have meaning for students and teachers. The commenter 
suggested that the model testing involve a teacher training component 
in how to interpret and translate research findings into practice.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the priority as written 
provides the potential to bridge the gap between research and practice 
and at the same time allows applicants the flexibility to select or 
create a model with such a training component.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department require 
applicants to develop approaches that use a broad body of content/
strategies that inform both special and regular education. The 
commenter also suggested that the applicant be required to present the 
research supporting the effectiveness of the content to be implemented 
and the rationale for site selection. It was further suggested that the 
term ``model'' was not appropriate because it suggested something 
standardized rather than an approach that could be ``* * * adapted and 
implemented to fit particular situations.''
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the approaches should be 
broad enough that they have potential implications for both special and 
general education. In fact, some of the models used as examples in the 
priority as written are based in regular education. The Secretary 
agrees that applicants should present the research literature 
supporting the effectiveness of the chosen approach and justify study 
sites, and notes that the selection criteria included in the 
application package address these issues. Further, judging the 
effectiveness of the implemented model is already a requirement of the 
priority. The Secretary believes that any further requirements would 
make the priority unnecessarily prescriptive.
    Regarding the commenters concern on the use of the term ``model'', 
for the purpose of this priority, the term ``model'' is meant in its 
more generic sense of a design or approach, thus allowing the applicant 
flexibility in selecting and implementing a knowledge utilization 
model.
    Changes: None.

Priority--Student-Initiated Research Projects

    Comment: One commenter stated that those working in classrooms are 
asking questions of immediate importance and suggested that this 
priority be modified to ``Teacher-Initiated Research Projects''.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that teachers are deserving of 
support, but notes that they are eligible to apply through their local 
educational agencies for awards under the Research in Education of 
Individuals with Disabilities Program. The Secretary believes that the 
priority as written is an important vehicle for attracting, promoting, 
and supporting potential new researchers on disability issues and is 
consistent with the student-initiated priority in the regulations at 34 
CFR 324.10(c).
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the competitive preference 
for students who are members of groups that have been underrepresented 
in the field of special education research be limited to a maximum of 
25% of the awards made within the competition. The commenter 
recommended a cap so that all eligible students believe the 
probabilities for competing are sufficient to warrant the investment in 
preparing a proposal.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the priority as written, 
while encouraging applications from members of underrepresented groups 
in special education research, does not significantly discourage 
applications from other applicants. There is no intent in this priority 
to set aside a certain number or percentage of awards for applicants 
meeting the competitive preference.
    Changes: None.

Priorities

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet any one of the following 
priorities. The Secretary will fund under these competitions only 
applications that meet any one of these absolute priorities:

Absolute Priority 1--Examining Alternatives for Outcome Assessment for 
Children with Disabilities

Background

    Many students with disabilities are currently excluded from 
national, State, and local outcome assessments and outcomes-based 
accountability systems. This exclusion has the effect of weakening 
educational accountability, limiting educational opportunities for 
students with disabilities, and denying these students the potential 
benefits of educational reforms.
    This problem is addressed in new Federal legislation, ``The Goals 
2000: Educate America Act.'' (Public Law 103-227, March 31, 1994). 
Section 220 of this Act supports development and evaluation of State 
assessments aligned with State educational standards, with a portion of 
the funds reserved for developing assessments for students with 
disabilities. Section 1015 calls for ``a comprehensive study of the 
inclusion of children with disabilities in school reform activities 
assisted under * * * [the Act].'' This study is to include ``* * * a 
review of the adequacy of assessments and measures used to gauge 
progress towards meeting * * * [education goals and standards], and an 
examination of other methods or accommodations necessary or desirable 
to collect data on the educational progress of children with 
disabilities, and the costs of such methods and accommodations * * *''. 
To support and complement such efforts, further research is needed on a 
variety of technical and implementation issues.

Priority

    The Assistant Secretary establishes an absolute priority for 
research projects that--
    (a) Pursue systematic programs of applied research focusing on one 
or more issues related to outcome assessment and/or outcomes-based 
accountability for students with disabilities. These issues include, 
but are not limited to:
    (1) Testing accommodations and adaptations. When adaptations and 
accommodations are made to permit students with disabilities to 
participate in outcome assessments, how are the technical 
characteristics of the assessments affected? How can the results be 
interpreted? To what degree can these scores be aggregated with 
nonadapted assessments? What are the best methods for selecting 
appropriate accommodations and adaptations? How can testing 
accommodations be related to instructional accommodations?
    (2) Alternative assessments. When alternative assessments (such as 
performance assessments or portfolio assessments) are provided for 
students with disabilities, how can these assessments be compared with 
conventional assessments? What technical criteria can appropriately be 
applied to these assessments when used with students with disabilities?
    (3) Development of assessments. How can general educational 
assessments be developed to be more inclusive for students with 
disabilities? How can problematic items and item formats be identified? 
How can students with disabilities be adequately represented in test 
development and validation samples? What are the effects when tests 
developed for general populations are administered to students with 
disabilities?
    (4) Including students with disabilities in general assessments. 
How should decisions be made and documented to include or exclude 
students with disabilities in general educational assessments or 
alternative assessments? What factors influence these decisions?
    (5) Standards and outcomes. How can standards and outcomes be 
developed for diverse populations? How can their appropriateness be 
judged?
    (6) System development. How can assessment and accountability 
systems be developed with the range and flexibility to accommodate 
diverse student populations? How can accountability and 
individualization both be maintained?
    (7) Basic concepts and principles. How can basic concepts and 
principles in assessment be revised to reflect new approaches to 
assessment and new roles and challenges in outcome assessment for 
diverse populations?
    (b) Produce and disseminate information that can be applied in 
educational programs, as well as in subsequent research; and
    (c) Coordinate their activities, as appropriate, with the Center to 
Support the Achievement of World Class Outcomes for Students with 
Disabilities, and with other related projects funded under The Goals 
2000: Educate America Act.
    A project must budget for two trips annually to Washington, D.C., 
for (1) a two-day Research Project Directors' meeting; and (2) another 
meeting, to meet and collaborate with the project officer of the Office 
of Special Education Programs and the other projects funded under this 
priority, to share information and to discuss findings and methods of 
dissemination.
    For Further Information Contact: David Malouf, U.S. Department 
of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Switzer Building, Room 
3521, Washington, D.C. 20202-2641. Telephone: (202) 205-8111. 
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-
8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

Absolute Priority 2--Studying Models That Bridge the Gap Between 
Research and Practice

Background

    Educational research most often includes the following phases: (1) 
planning and preparation; (2) information gathering; (3) analysis and 
interpretation; (4) reporting and dissemination; and (5) use of 
findings. In traditional research models, the researcher is solely or 
primarily responsible for all phases but the last. Using research 
findings is seen as a job for the practitioner. However, it has been 
observed that research knowledge rarely translates directly into 
practice.
    In recent years, a variety of models have been developed to bridge 
the gap between research and practice by altering the roles of 
researchers and practitioners in the school district for one or more 
phases of the research. In some models (e.g., interactive research and 
development, teacher-researcher partnership research) researchers and 
practitioners collaborate in all phases of the research process. Some 
of these models include parents on their school-based teams. In other 
models, practitioners, working individually (e.g., teacher research 
linkers) or in groups (e.g., teacher study groups), or in pairs (e.g., 
peer coaching) interpret extant research to understand how to integrate 
research into practice. In some models, teachers conduct research 
(e.g., action research, collegial experimentation). To date there have 
been few systematic examinations of the effectiveness of these models 
to improve practice in special education.

Priority

    The Assistant Secretary establishes an absolute priority for 
research projects to implement and examine a model(s) for using 
research knowledge to improve education practice and outcomes for 
children with disabilities.
    In studying a model(s), projects must apply methodologies with the 
capacity to judge the effectiveness of the model(s) as implemented in 
practice settings. The projects must identify the knowledge utilization 
model(s) to be studied, specify the components of the knowledge 
utilization model(s) selected or created, the supports and policies 
necessary to support the model(s), both alterable and unalterable 
factors affecting practice improvement, and the effect of the model(s) 
to improve the school culture, teacher attitudes and practices, and 
student outcomes. In judging effectiveness, the projects must address 
improvements for researchers, practitioners, and children and youth 
with disabilities.
    The projects must report their findings in a manner which can serve 
as a ``blueprint'' for practitioners and researchers in other school 
districts to implement the model using research knowledge to improve 
practice in special education.
    A project must budget for two trips annually to Washington, D.C., 
for (1) a two-day Research Project Directors' meeting; and (2) another 
meeting, to meet and collaborate with the project officer of the Office 
of Special Education Programs and the other projects funded under this 
priority, to share information and to discuss findings and methods of 
dissemination.
    For Further Information Contact: Jane Hauser, U.S. Department of 
Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Switzer Building, Room 3521, 
Washington, D.C. 20202-2641. Telephone: (202) 205-8126. Individuals who 
use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

Absolute Priority 3--Student-Initiated Research Projects

    This priority provides support for short-term (up to 12 months) 
postsecondary student-initiated research projects focusing on special 
education and related services for children and youth with disabilities 
and early intervention services for infants and toddlers, consistent 
with the purposes of the program, as described in 34 CFR 324.1.
    Projects must--
    (1) Develop research skills in postsecondary students; and
    (2) Include a principal investigator who serves as a mentor to the 
student/researcher while the project is carried out by the student.
    A project must budget for a trip to Washington, D.C. for the annual 
two-day Research Project Directors' meeting.
    Competitive Priority: Within this absolute priority 3, the 
Secretary, under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii), will give preference to 
applications that meet the following competitive priority. An 
application that meets this competitive priority would be selected by 
the Secretary over applications of comparable merit that do not meet 
the priority:
    A project that would give a priority to providing support for 
postsecondary students who are members of groups that have been 
underrepresented in the field of special education research, such as 
members of racial or ethnic minority groups (e.g. Black, Hispanic, 
American Indian, Alaskan Native, Asian, or Pacific Islander), and 
individuals with disabilities.
    For Further Information Contact: Melville J. Appell, U.S. 
Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Switzer 
Building, Room 3529, Washington, D.C. 20202-2641. Telephone: (202) 205-
8113. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf 
(TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-
877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through 
Friday.
    Applicable program regulations: 34 CFR Part 324.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1441-1443.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.023, Research in 
Education of Individuals with Disabilities Program).

    Dated: November 15, 1994.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 94-28582 Filed 11-18-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P