Families and advocates press Maryland board for stronger inclusion, special‑education standards

Multiple parents, advocates and students spoke to the State Board about inclusion and special education during public comment, urging stronger statewide guidance, monitoring of district staffing and funding, and clearer pathways for non‑public placements under new state law.

Sharon Saroff, an advocate who works on IEPs, emphasized enforcement questions about HB0448 (CH0648): she said some children who need non‑public placements remain in limbo for years because districts assert they can provide services in public settings despite progress‑report evidence to the contrary. Saroff cited an example of a high‑school student who cannot perform basic multiplication yet received an A in a modified course.

Representatives of disability‑rights and Down syndrome advocacy groups called for MSDE to set statewide standards for evidence‑based instruction and special education service models, require alignment of IEP goals with those models, monitor staffing plans and funding allocations, and ensure educator preparation programs equip general and special educators to serve all learners. Liz Zogby (Maryland Down Syndrome Advocacy Coalition) and several parents described instances where students are routinely moved into self‑contained classrooms starting in kindergarten and said many families must fight individually to secure supports.

Self‑advocates and parents framed inclusion as a civil right and an opportunity for positive peer relationships. Student speakers described how inclusive settings benefited social skills, academic engagement and sense of belonging; parents said they worry about district practices that push for segregated placements.

Board response and next steps: board members thanked speakers and acknowledged the convening of a Blueprint Special Education Work Group; MSDE said it is convening a work group and will consider the comments as it develops implementation guidance and monitoring related to the Blueprint and recent legislation.

Ending: advocates asked the board to use its authority to ensure consistent implementation across LEAs and to publish clear expectations for staffing, services and monitoring that prioritize the least‑restrictive environment.