<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Case for Special Education Vouchers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/</link>
	<description>Education Next is a journal of opinion and research about education policy.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 18:44:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: School Vouchers and Gifted Education (Part Two) &#171; Gifted Phoenix&#039;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-69621</link>
		<dc:creator>School Vouchers and Gifted Education (Part Two) &#171; Gifted Phoenix&#039;s Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:46:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-69621</guid>
		<description>[...] to this article  four states—Florida (1999), Georgia (2007), Ohio (2003), and Utah (2005) operate schemes that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to this article  four states—Florida (1999), Georgia (2007), Ohio (2003), and Utah (2005) operate schemes that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Committee to consider Education Tax Credits - Civitas Review Online</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-63950</link>
		<dc:creator>Committee to consider Education Tax Credits - Civitas Review Online</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-63950</guid>
		<description>[...] take my word.  Education Next,  an education reform journal of considerable influence states a compelling case for special needs vouchers  and answers many of the objections of voucher opponents.  Rep. Stam&#8217;s bill (HB 344) is [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] take my word.  Education Next,  an education reform journal of considerable influence states a compelling case for special needs vouchers  and answers many of the objections of voucher opponents.  Rep. Stam&#8217;s bill (HB 344) is [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milwaukee&#8217;s &#8220;Village Idiot&#8221; Defends Private Voucher School&#8217;s Refusal To Serve Special Education Students &#171; Larry Miller&#039;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-44693</link>
		<dc:creator>Milwaukee&#8217;s &#8220;Village Idiot&#8221; Defends Private Voucher School&#8217;s Refusal To Serve Special Education Students &#171; Larry Miller&#039;s Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 22:12:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-44693</guid>
		<description>[...] is absurd, but what’s more, it points to another direction the Legislature could look: Perhaps, as is done in some other states, it could permit the parents of children with special needs extra aid that they could take with [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is absurd, but what’s more, it points to another direction the Legislature could look: Perhaps, as is done in some other states, it could permit the parents of children with special needs extra aid that they could take with [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: State Policy Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; House Passes Special Ed &#8220;Reform&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-14750</link>
		<dc:creator>State Policy Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; House Passes Special Ed &#8220;Reform&#8221;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-14750</guid>
		<description>[...] funding - the dollars should follow students to the school they choose to attend. In fact, special education vouchers have proven successful and noncontroversial in a number of states.        Posted in Contributors on June 25, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] funding &#8211; the dollars should follow students to the school they choose to attend. In fact, special education vouchers have proven successful and noncontroversial in a number of states.        Posted in Contributors on June 25, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Education Next</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-1200</link>
		<dc:creator>Education Next</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 17:14:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-1200</guid>
		<description>To read the authors&#039; response to the above letter please see their blog post - http://educationnext.org/assertions-cant-trump-research-in-the-debate-over-special-ed-vouchers/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To read the authors&#8217; response to the above letter please see their blog post &#8211; <a href="http://educationnext.org/assertions-cant-trump-research-in-the-debate-over-special-ed-vouchers/" rel="nofollow">http://educationnext.org/assertions-cant-trump-research-in-the-debate-over-special-ed-vouchers/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Education Next</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-1198</link>
		<dc:creator>Education Next</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:46:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-1198</guid>
		<description>The following was submitted as a letter to the editor:

Jay Greene and Stuart Buck are correct that some children with disabilities have unique needs requiring private schooling. That’s why the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) allows children with disabilities to attend private schools at public expense when their districts cannot provide a Free, Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

But only a small percentage of children with disabilities have such placements--not, as Greene and Buck contend, because the law&#039;s processes for securing private placements are inadequate, but because the vast majority of children with disabilities can, and do, receive FAPE in the public schools. That’s not to gloss over the shortcomings in our special education system, or the difficulties some parents face obtaining services for their children. But there’s no evidence that children with disabilities need additional education options more than any other youngsters in underperforming schools, or that vouchers address the underlying problems in special education. Rather, voucher proponents have seized on this population because they are more sympathetic beneficiaries than poor and minority youngsters. Using children with disabilities to increase public support for vouchers may be smart politics, but it doesn’t mean that special education vouchers are good policy.

Policymakers must take steps to expand educational options for children with disabilities and make it easier for their parents to access needed services. But special education vouchers are not the best way to do this, and create other, adverse consequences, such as further segregating or perpetuating double standards for children with disabilities and creating perverse incentives for parents and educators. Other approaches--expanding high-cost/low-incidence pools, improving IDEA&#039;s dispute resolution and placement processes, enhancing charter schools&#039; capacity to serve children with disabilities, and authorizing more charters with specific missions to serve disabled youngsters—have more promise to expand high-quality, accountable options for youngsters with disabilities.

Sara Mead
Senior Research Fellow
New America Foundation</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The following was submitted as a letter to the editor:</p>
<p>Jay Greene and Stuart Buck are correct that some children with disabilities have unique needs requiring private schooling. That’s why the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) allows children with disabilities to attend private schools at public expense when their districts cannot provide a Free, Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).</p>
<p>But only a small percentage of children with disabilities have such placements&#8211;not, as Greene and Buck contend, because the law&#8217;s processes for securing private placements are inadequate, but because the vast majority of children with disabilities can, and do, receive FAPE in the public schools. That’s not to gloss over the shortcomings in our special education system, or the difficulties some parents face obtaining services for their children. But there’s no evidence that children with disabilities need additional education options more than any other youngsters in underperforming schools, or that vouchers address the underlying problems in special education. Rather, voucher proponents have seized on this population because they are more sympathetic beneficiaries than poor and minority youngsters. Using children with disabilities to increase public support for vouchers may be smart politics, but it doesn’t mean that special education vouchers are good policy.</p>
<p>Policymakers must take steps to expand educational options for children with disabilities and make it easier for their parents to access needed services. But special education vouchers are not the best way to do this, and create other, adverse consequences, such as further segregating or perpetuating double standards for children with disabilities and creating perverse incentives for parents and educators. Other approaches&#8211;expanding high-cost/low-incidence pools, improving IDEA&#8217;s dispute resolution and placement processes, enhancing charter schools&#8217; capacity to serve children with disabilities, and authorizing more charters with specific missions to serve disabled youngsters—have more promise to expand high-quality, accountable options for youngsters with disabilities.</p>
<p>Sara Mead<br />
Senior Research Fellow<br />
New America Foundation</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: School Choice Campaign &#187; The Case for Special Education Vouchers</title>
		<link>http://educationnext.org/the-case-for-special-education-vouchers/comment-page-1/#comment-388</link>
		<dc:creator>School Choice Campaign &#187; The Case for Special Education Vouchers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:03:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educationnext.org/?p=49629907#comment-388</guid>
		<description>[...] Education Next, Oct 2009    Comment [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Education Next, Oct 2009    Comment [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

