LISTEN TO THE EPISODE

Louis Freedberg: 0:04
Welcome to Education on the Line, a podcast series focused on the latest threats to public education. Today we'll be looking at threats to hard-won gains made by and on behalf of millions of disabled children in our schools as a result of threatened layoffs at the U.S. Department of Education, and how school leaders, advocates, parents, and students themselves can best respond. During the government shutdown, the Trump administration has issued layoff notices to almost everyone in the key agencies in the Department of Education that have been responsible for implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the key piece of civil rights education that allows students to receive special education services in schools across the United States. I'm pleased to welcome two guests who have been at the center of the battles around special education for many years. Jacki Rodriguez is CEO of the National Center on Learning Disabilities. She worked for the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education before that. And she's been a special education faculty member at the School of Education at William and Mary College. She's also a former special ed teacher at the elementary, middle, and high school level. Welcome, Jacki Rodriguez.
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 1:23
It's great to be here with you, Louis. I'm looking forward to the conversation.
Louis Freedberg: 1:26
And to bring us the state perspective, I'm also pleased that Kristin Wright, who wasi Director of Special Education for the State of California until 2020, has been able to join us. Before directing special education in California, she was an advisor on special education to California's State Board of Education. She has a teaching credential as well as a master's degree in special education. She's currently executive director at the Sacramento County Office of Education. And she also co-leads the California Center for Inclusive Colleges. Welcome, Kristin Wright.
Kristin Wright: 2:06
Thank you. It's great to be here. Thanks for having me.
Louis Freedberg: 2:09
And we'll have to get you on another show to explain to us the work you're doing at the Center for Inclusive Colleges. I would love that. Let me turn to Jacki Rodriguez. There's been substantial reporting about the pretty draconian cutbacks that the Trump administration has proposed for the U.S. Department of Education. Could you just tell us what the administration is trying to do and your understanding of where things stand on that front right now?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 2:38
Let me start first by my understanding of what's taking place. And I can only speculate on what the administration is attempting to do. But I think there's enough evidence to suggest that the end game for the administration is the beginning of the administration's tenure this year, their uh intention to dismantle the Department of Ed. So all of that being the same, Congress is the only body that can dismantle an agency like the Department of Education. And earlier this year, when I met with the Secretary of Education myself, I asked her very specifically whether or not she would be moving IDEA, which is our seminal special education law, out of the Department of Ed and moving it into the Health and Human Services Agency. And she very clearly said that it was not only increasingly unlikely, but that may not be the best space for IDEA any longer. And now, four months later, after that call or that meeting, we see an entire gutting of the agency and in particular the spaces in which IDEA would be functional, which are the OSERS, OSEP and RSA departments.
Louis Freedberg: 3:53
IDEA is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act legislation that's been in effect for decades that guarantees every student with disabilities. I think the term is a free and appropriate education, right?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 4:08
Louis, you're 100% on the spot. 1975 IDEA was passed initially, and it was only after decades of advocacy by families of students with disabilities that that law was brought to the congressional review and then passed. And we have now had it for 50 years. Its anniversary is this November, and we were hoping to celebrate the law as opposed to having to advocate for it to be continued. When you eliminate the people at the department that oversee this seminal legislation, you're not trimming the fat as the administration has been purporting, right? What you're really doing is cutting out the mechanisms that ensure states comply with the law and the students get the services that they are entitled to. It's not bureaucracy that's being lost, it's the protection for students.
Louis Freedberg: 5:00
It seems like they have been achieving their goals in this regard, but there's this Office for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. And they basically try to lay off all but one or two people in this entire agency. And OSERS oversees a bunch of special ed programs. Is that correct?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 5:24
That's correct. So OSERS for the layperson is how the federal government helps with guidance, with monitoring, with maintenance, and of course with compliance with the law. But in addition to that, it provides extensive research supports and research endeavors. OSERS is particularly why we know what's going on with kids with special education services across the country. They also, unbeknownst to many people, help prepare personnel, which is talent. So there are funds that come out of OSEP specifically, which is under OSERS, that help prepare master's degree students and doctoral students who serve students with special education needs.
Louis Freedberg: 6:07
And OSEP being the Office of Special Education Programs. So a lot of acronyms. But Jacki, you have a very personal connection to this issue.
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 6:20
I became a special education teacher in my early 20s. So I have been in this field for decades now. But it wasn't until I became a parent and my own child started receiving services that I truly understood what it meant to be on both sides of the table. I have now been a teacher. I have been a faculty member preparing future teachers and future attorneys in the space. I've also advocated for great policy and supports for students in schools. And now I'm a parent whose daughter is receiving those services. So from all facets, I can give you some perspective on what it's like to be in a variety of school settings and how invaluable and incredibly necessary this law is, but without the personnel to help support and enforce the law, it truly is words on paper.
Louis Freedberg: 7:19
Let me ask you though, as a parent, you know that really what matters is what services and support your child is getting at the school in the local level. Does what happens at Washington really have an impact on what's happening at a local level?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 7:37
Services might be delivered locally, but they exist because of the federal civil rights law IDEA. And that is a promise that the federal government has gifted to students. And OSEP is the agency that essentially is charged, who's making sure that promise is fulfilled. And so parents may look at the child school as the local level supports. And of course, that singular educator, or perhaps in the secondary levels, multiple educators are fulfilling that promise every single day. But the federal government and particular OTAs with the Office of Special Ed Programs, Rehabilitative Services, those are the folks that day in and day out get the phone calls from parents. They feel that the supports from teachers that are being requested. They provide the technical assistance to the school systems. So without the infrastructure, the local level is deeply impacted.
Louis Freedberg: 8:37
I just want to ask you before I go to Kristin Wright. I gather there's about 8 million students now and young adults who are served through IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act programs. Your organization represents kids with learning disabilities, which I see is the largest category of students. About one-third of students among those eight million are classified as having learning disabilities. I think there's been a lot of attention on the growth of autistic kids, but what are your concerns about those kids being served?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 9:14
Well, as you mentioned, Louis, we are seeing 15% of the nation's school-aged population identified with a disability. It's a huge proportion of kids receiving services, either with an IEP plan or a 504 plan. And then if you think about the proportion of those that receive supports and services for a learning disability, which is a brain-based learning disorder in which it impacts academic, like reading, mathematics, and writing, and executive functioning is a very big part of a learning disability. Those of us who have to organize every day, sequence when we're going to be doing things, keep time, transfer something we just learned from working memory into what we have to remember for a test, into long-term memory. We understand how deeply important these functions of the brain are. And so for the population that we serve, we find students all the time who have a learning disability and perhaps have anxiety, or they may have also ADHD or other mental health concerns. And it's not surprising a kid in a classroom who's struggling academically to continue to process reading or to calculate in mathematics would often find themselves struggling emotionally or figuring out what is it about themselves that might be different than other kids. And so when we consider that these students just lost their strongest advocate in the federal government, my deepest concern is that families are going to become the compliance officers. And they're going to bear the burden of ensuring what is legally entitled to students is actually being provided to their kids.
Louis Freedberg: 11:08
And just I know many of you listening would know what an IEP is, but the IEP is the Individualized Education Plan that schools are required to draw up. And the parents have to agree to that. And this is the core of assuring that kids get the services that they need.
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 11:26
That's right. Every student who receives a special education IEP is entitled to an individualized plan for their education. It's meant to be individualized, how they learn and how they can demonstrate competency, as well as how they comport in the classroom and how they want to navigate the transition into adulthood. And it's typically inclusive of the types of goals that the student has, the school system has for that student, and importantly, how the parent and the family wants to subscribe to those same goals to support the student's livelihood.
Louis Freedberg: 12:05
Let me ask Kristin Wright, you were in the hot seat there running a state department of special education, dealing, I imagine, probably on a daily basis with the U.S. Department of Education. What are your concerns about these threatened and at this point looks like likely evisceration of some of these key agencies in the Department of Education?
Kristin Wright: 12:28
I don't like the signal that it sends. I think that from the perspective of just the general public hearing that this is not something that is valued is highly problematic. I do think, though, that states take on a very large role in ensuring IDEA. And I know for California, um, we have a pretty significant amount of IDEA codified in our state law. And our state agency takes very seriously keeping IDEA intact in California. And so when Jacki was talking about the parent interactions with the Fed, my perspective is that those interactions that most parents and families are having are with our state department and that they are filing complaints or have questions that they get assistance from our state. Now, I don't know how every State Department looks. I just know how the one in California looks. And I know that we field hundreds and hundreds of calls and talk to parents and administrators daily, much more than we talk to the U.S. Department of Education. All that said, if the rights for children and people with disabilities are valued in the United States, we have to have both funding that supports that and the oversight that also supports that. And the signal to have either of those impacted is highly concerning. Now we know that the promise of IDEA was always at 40% of the funding that it takes for states to implement IDA or schools to. And we've never come close to that. In California, it's only been about 10 to 15% of the total costs of implementing the IDEA have been realized. And so that's been a problem.
Louis Freedberg: 14:20
And just to clarify, you when you say the federal government was supposed to, or is supposed to come up with 40% of the average cost of serving kids through this IDEA. And it's never happened. Is that what you're saying?
Kristin Wright: 14:35
It's never happened. It's never happened. Um, we've only come up to maybe 20% in some places. I don't think that's ever been true in California. But um that's one aspect of what's been advocated for probably for 50 years every single year. And so I do think though that having oversight and the signal that it sends is highly important. So having the US Department of Education and especially Office of Special Education programs, we need that um agency as sort of the parent or guardian of IDEA on a national level. And so I think it's important so that if we do have states that would not uphold it in the same way that I feel California will be, we won't have a national norm. We will have states that all have different ways that they are supporting students with disabilities. And that's scary.
Louis Freedberg: 15:31
Kristin, you also have a very personal connection to this issue.
Kristin Wright: 15:36
I do. I have a daughter, Shelby, who is in her 20s now and who has exited out of our public education system, who has a very extensive support needs and required a lot of supports and services as she was being included in her school and classrooms throughout her education. And so, particularly for the Shelby's of the world, I am extremely concerned because students with those more extensive support needs, and you mentioned before, um, there are a lot more students that we're seeing that have autism that have a lot more extensive support needs in our schools. We need that support and we need that floor to build upon for services. So we need that guarantee. And I am very concerned that the signals that we're seeing, particularly around decimating the department of education, but also this idea that they're want to move potentially into health and human services, comes with it some big concerns about, you know, are we moving back towards the medical model that we've tried to move away from and things like that?
Louis Freedberg: 16:44
Well, let me just press you on that a little bit, because my view, Jacki, your view, I think Kristin's your view and other people that this is just a step towards shutting down the Department of Education. That allegedly the administration says they support special ed. So what are they going to do with special ed if there's no department? And all the, I won't say the signals, but Project 2025 and Russell Vogue, who helped write the thing, he has proposed also moving it over to uh health and human services. Now, originally, the Department of Education only came into being in 1979. That was after the IDA law was passed. It was so it was actually over there, and that's one of the arguments they make. Although it was for the old timers, the original title, the department was HEW, Health Education and Welfare. They took education out and put it over at the Department of Education. But Kristin Wright, who ran a department of special education or f the state of California with millions of students. Wouldn't that be okay if as long as it's safeguarded? What are your concerns, or do you have any concerns about it being over at HHS?
Kristin Wright: 17:59
I think the first issue is that I'm not a fan of decimating something without a plan. And so we have this law that needs to be upheld, and none of us are sure what the plan is, right? So I'm not against some sort of redesign, but I think that should come with a lot of whatever lessons we've learned and what research is telling us about how we support and serve students with disabilities. Now, like I just mentioned, if we're moving back towards more of a medical model, that is more of a this idea around um fixing disability versus seeing disability as a natural part of the human condition and as diversity versus something that is more, I guess, physical in nature or something again that has to be fixed. I think that the one benefit, if you if we could find a bright shining light in the darkness, would be that we would want to create a more integrated system of care for children and families. And so, you know, we've seen with some of our movement towards the community school models and more of a whole child approach that we would want to consider a closer relationship with health and human services because those are the supports that children and families receive in order for the conditions of learning to be in place. And so if there's a tighter connection there, I think that's a great idea. But is it a great idea to move it in there without a plan? And where's the rest of education then? Because again, we don't want to silo students with disabilities or special education in his own land and then have the rest of education somewhere else. So I'm I'm curious. That's why this whole idea of not having a plan and a strategy for what we want for education writ large is problematic.
Louis Freedberg: 19:49
Let me turn to Jacki Rodriguez,CEO o f the National Center for Learning Disabilities. Do you have concerns about this plan to move it to HHS?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 20:00
Deep, deep concerns. I'm not as optimistic, perhaps as Kristin is, around the potential for outcomes if a move was to go to HHS. I think this is the disability community and the advocacy groups that are doing our best to communicate to Congress and to those left at the department have communicated authentically, thoughtfully, steadfastly, that the entire purpose behind the Department of Education and why it's not part of the Bureau any longer at HEW is because it wasn't functional there. It had to move into its own agency because it was a dysfunctional portion without the type of infrastructure necessary to truly guide the education of all students. And so I would argue that the birth of the Department of Education was intentional based on research and based on outcomes. And the dismantling of it not only is unplanned and unstrategic, but take it a step further. I'm deeply concerned that while the functions of the law may be placed within a different agency like HHS, the oversight and the supports coming from the Office of Civil Rights might not be moved with it. The Office of Civil Rights works hand in glove with the Office of Special Education Programs and Rehabilitative Services. All of those departments have been decimated. But the intention, I think, that the administration has now is not to full kit and caboodle move, but rather to break apart, dismantle, and disperse. And so what we might be seeing is IDEA on paper is functionally navigated through Health and Human Services, Office of Civil Rights, which maintains compliance with supportive OSEP, goes to justice. And the portion around rehabilitative services goes to labor.
Louis Freedberg: 21:56
Department of Labor, Department of Justice.
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 21:58
Exactly. So the wraparound services that Kristin was mentioning earlier that would be ideal for a student would no longer exist at all. We would have even further disbursement of supports for families and for kids. And I think a great example of why the department is necessary in this sense is while California has done a spectacular job of supporting families and has truly guided how IDEA is in the spirit of the law and the function of the law is meant to be supportive of students. Not every state in this nation has done so. So when we think about the more recent history, we look at states like Texas, states like Idaho, where the Office of Special Education programs, while parents have the due process in the state to, as Kristin mentioned, call the state up and say, we're concerned or we think there's something going on or there's discrimination. They also parents have the right to call the Office of Special Education programs. And parents within Texas and parents within Idaho exercised their due process within the state. They exhausted that. They had no remedy and they had to go to OSEP in order for them to intervene and investigate. As recently as 2018, we saw Texas put an arbitrary cap on the amount of students that they would identify as needing special education services. When the whole country was close to 12 and 13% of students receiving services are being identified for such, Texas was at eight. Nearly half the students in Texas that should have been receiving services weren't. And it required the Department of Education to intervene and hold them to a higher standard and have them come into compliance. Idaho, similarly, just two years ago, was using a model for identifying kids with learning disabilities that was not compliant with the federal IDEA. Same thing. OSEP had to come in and investigate and help Idaho come into compliance. And so while we do have bright spots, we still in the recent history have several states that have required supports and interventions that the federal government is responsible for.
Louis Freedberg: 24:19
And OSEP again offers those special education programs at the Department of Education that Russell Vote really wants to wipe out entirely. One of the things that's been notable about special ed, it really has had bipartisan support over the years. Probably because disability is not distributed based on political affiliation. That's number one. Number two, and maybe for this reason, the Trump administration is not proposing cutbacks in special education funding, which is kind of remarkable given the cutbacks they're proposing everywhere else. Is that something that one can build on? Is that is that at least uh kind of uh gives you some leverage that maybe other programs and other areas of government don't have?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 25:04
The special education community, which includes the students receiving the services, the parents supporting the students, and the educators, right? The community is highly practiced in advocacy. To Kristin's earlier point, right? The the legislation that we use to create these legally required parts of education for kids 50 years ago, but it required 20 years of advocacy to get it there. So that's the leverage point, is that we're all in concert saying, how can you say that you support kids with disabilities and then completely dismantle the infrastructure required to ensure that that actually happens? And the administration may not have cut the budget line in particular, but they did zero out large programs, including the president's budget, which zeroed out completely the National Center on Special Education Research. So that again is a signal that the administration is saying they support kids with disabilities, but in action are they're completely contradictory.
Louis Freedberg: 26:12
So I do want to get both of your thoughts on what people who are in the trenches, maybe starting with education leaders, what can and should they be doing right now?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 26:25
The fact that we're on this podcast talking about it, the fact that the lay person sitting in a living room watching television is hearing about it, says everything. This isn't a small issue, it's a broader issue. It's a signal around how we think about other humans in our society and what kinds of not just supports, but expectations we have for those humans long term. And education is a public good. In a democracy, when we think about educating it's the populace, democracies consider education a public good. And if we are dismantling the infrastructure, if we're removing the guardrails, if we're reducing the supports, if we're eliminating the research around that education, which includes general education, we are signaling to the populace that we no longer think an educated citizenry is necessary. So I do think it's every single person's responsibility to stand up, call their congressperson, reach out to websites like ours and other disability groups. We all have action alerts up. You can remain anonymous in many cases. Congress does need to hear from the general public. They don't just need to hear from parents and educators who are being impacted, which are important, but they definitely need to hear from every single person who believes in educated citizenry, that this issue is not partisan and it's also not meant to be political. It is meant to ensure that as people age, they have livelihoods where they can be successful and add value to society. And so I encourage us to share the podcast to encourage people to educate others on what's happening. Lots of people are not following the Department of Education because they no longer have kids in school systems. But if we tell our friends and neighbors the value of the department and how Congress can weigh in with the administration to reverse decisions and how important it is for us to be working collectively as opposed to in a deeply partisan way, then I think we can become unified at least around the education of our kids.
Louis Freedberg: 28:48
Kristin, you are in a county office of education. You must deal with superintendents, local educators all the time. What are your thoughts about how people could or should respond?
Kristin Wright: 28:59
I agree with Jacki around the idea that it's really every citizen's responsibility to stand up for the education of its citizens. And in this case, our students who may need extra supports and services or a different way of teaching and learning in order to be able to meet all the same types of goals and outcomes and dreams as everyone else. This is really what our democracy is built on. We should not in any way stop what we're doing around supporting students with disabilities. We've made a lot of progress in California. We have our own accountability system that ensures that we focus on students with disabilities as a key student group, despite the other federal things. Now, that said, we are California. And if you are a local superintendent or administrator, our message, and I know the message from our state director, Rachel Heenan, is been please continue to do what you're doing. And even if you if you feel like you need to double down so that people understand. That this is still important. And I've received a lot of calls from parents. I'm sure Jacki has too, saying, I've heard that my child's IEP is at risk. And what I would say is our larger democracy is at risk around education. But today, your child's IEP remains intact. And it's still state and federal law that students have the rights under their IEP, and states are still required to support everything they've been supporting all this time. And so we have to stay the course locally and regionally. And we all have to be pushing and letting our congressmen, women, and senators know that this matters to us. Especially because IDEA has been around, and to your point, was bipartisan. It was a Republican president at the time, Gerald Ford in 1975, who put this in place.
Louis Freedberg: 31:08
And it is really disturbing to see years later, first of all, the full promise of that law has not been realized. And to see the threats against it. I'll also mention that one of my closest friends for many years was Judy Human, who was a leader in the disability rights struggle. And one thing I'll say about Judy, she kept going. I mean, literally until the day she died, unfortunately passed away a couple of years ago. And one of the things that she was in a wheelchair got polio when she was five years old. I never heard Judy complain, never, about herself. She kept going. That's the example that we need to follow for the people who this affects deeply on a daily basis. And Jacki Rodriguez, what are you telling your members now? What are you telling them to do? And what's next?
Jacqueline Rodriguez: 32:07
We are telling everybody that is listening that this isn't a Washington problem, that everybody needs to recognize the necessity to get involved, and that this is a civil rights problem that they need to continue tracking and investing energy into. NCLD and other advocacy groups will never stop fighting to ensure, as Kristin pointed out, that every student with a disability receives the inclusive, high-quality education that they are promised that is rooted in civil rights. It's not eroded by them. And so this isn't just a policy issue. This is a matter of principle and about our moral compass as a country and where we believe we want to put the heart and soul of our work. And I truly believe most people think that that should be in students and in kids. So I hope people agree with us.
Louis Freedberg: 33:15
On that note, we have to bring this episode of Education on the Line to a close. I want to thank our guests, Jacki Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center on Learning Disabilities, and Kristin Wright, the former Director of Special Education for the State of California. I really appreciate it.
Kristin Wright: 33:32
Thanks for having us. Great to be here.
Louis Freedberg: 33:56
Please let us know what impact changes at the U.S. Department of Education are having on your school district and what you see as needed to protect the civil rights of disabled children in the United States. Please subscribe to Education on the Line wherever you get your podcast. I'm Louis Freedberg. Thanks for joining us.

In this episode of Education on the Line, we examine how the Trump administration is using the shutdown to eviscerate key agencies in the U.S. Department of Education that oversee enforcement and the integrity of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. IDEA is the landmark civil rights legislation that, in theory, leaves nearly 8 million children and young adults with disabilities the right to a free and appropriate education. In conversation with veteran education journalist Louis Freedberg, Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, and Kristin Wright, former director of special education in California, describe what is at stake. Both are parents of disabled children. They emphasize that rather than the federal government, the focus must remain on what is happening at a school district and state level, which is where primary responsibility lies for ensuring that children in special education programs are adequately served.

Key Topics Covered:

0:04 Setting The Stakes For IDEA
2:29 Guests And Backgrounds Introduced
2:46 What The Federal Cuts Target
5:24 Why OSERS And OSEP Matter
6:20 A Parent And Educator’s View
7:30 Do Federal Actions Impact Schools
9:01 Who IDEA Serves And How
12:39 States’ Role And Funding Gaps
16:59 HHS Move: Risks And Models
21:33 Breaking Apart Oversight
24:15 Bipartisan History Versus Signals
26:12 What Leaders And Citizens Can Do
30:15 Reassurances And Urgency

LISTEN IN YOUR FAVORITE APP

Guest:

Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center for Learning Disabilities
Kristin Wright, Executive Director of Inclusive Practices and Support Services at the Sacramento County Office of Education. She was previously Director of Special Education for the state of California.