AlternativeSchoolsPolicy and LegislationAcross the United States

Research Report 1By Camilla A. Lehr, Eric J. Lanners,and Cheryl M. Lange

Institute on Community Integration (UCEDD)

Printed October 2003

This report was produced by the Alternative Schools Research Project, Institute on Community Integra-tion (UCEDD), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. This research is funded by the U.S.Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (H324D010034-01). Opinions expressedherein do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of the U.S. Department of Education, Office ofSpecial Education Programs and no official endorsement should be inferred.

The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to itsprograms, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex,age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation.

This report is available in alternative formats upon request. This report is also available on the Web athttp://ici.umn.edu/alternativeschools/.

For information on alternate formats, contact —

Publications OfficeInstitute on Community IntegrationUniversity of Minnesota109 Pattee Hall, 150 Pillsbury DriveMinneapolis, MN 55455

Tel: 612-624-4512E-mail: publications@icimail.education.umn.eduWeb: ici.umn.edu

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 1

AbstractAlternative schools have emerged over the yearsas one educational option for students who arenot successful in traditional school settings. Thenumber of these schools is growing rapidly, yet weknow very little about similarities in policy andpractice across states. This report provides a listand review of current state legislation and policyfrom 48 states that had some type of legislationaddressing alternative schools or programs.Information is organized and discussed withregard to enrollment criteria, alternative schooldefinition, funding, curriculum, staffing, andstudents with disabilities. Implications of thefindings are discussed in relation to historicalcontext and current forces shaping alternativeschools today.

IntroductionMeeting the needs of students disenfranchisedfrom the traditional education system is becomingmore and more important as we are faced with agrowing population of students for whom thestatus quo is not successful. Alternative educationis one of the possible solutions that many statesand local school districts are implementing toaddress the issue of students who are not meetingdesired educational outcomes and standards intraditional education settings.

Alternative education is not a new concept,and it has been an active player in the Americanpublic school system for over 40 years. Alternativeeducation has evolved over the course of itshistory with little agreement on its definition.“Within the past 20 years, the term alternativeeducation has been applied indiscriminately tosuch a wide variety of programs that its meaninghas been clouded in confusion among educators,students, and the general public” (Kellmayer,1995, p. 2). A recent literature review suggests aclear definition of alternative education still doesnot exist (Lange & Sletten, 2002). However, at thispoint in its evolution, most agree that alternativeschools are defined by the tendency to servestudents who are at-risk for school failure withinthe traditional educational system. The U.S.Department of Education defines an alternativeeducation school as “…a public elementary/secondary school that addresses the needs ofstudents which typically cannot be met in aregular school and provides nontraditional educa-tion which is not categorized solely as regulareducation, special education, vocational educa-tion, gifted and talented or magnet school pro-grams” (U.S. Department of Education, 2002,p.55). However, the way in which the definition isoperationalized within states and communities isstill unclear.

Even with the lack of clarity in definition,alternative schools are growing at a rapid rate.

2

More and more states and local districts areproviding an alternative to the traditional school.The National Center for Educational Statistics(NCES) Common Core of Data reported therewere 2,606 public alternative schools in 1993-1994, compared to 3,850 public alternativeschools in 1997-98. A recent survey estimatedthat there were 10,900 public alternative schoolsand programs with 612,000 students or 1.3% ofall public school students in the United States in2000-2001 (Kleiner, Porch, & Farris, 2002). Yet,even with this growth in alternative education,there is scant documentation of what alternativeeducation is and its success at meeting the needsof the students it serves.

In general, the definition and characteristics ofalternative education are determined by individualstates or school districts. We do not know theextent to which definitions are similar among thestates, or whether states have even addressedalternative education through law and policy.Documenting how states are approaching alterna-tive education in law is one way of understandingthe role alternative education is playing inAmerica’s public school system. An aggregateddocumentation of state laws was published in1998 (Katsiyannis & Williams, 1998). The purposeof their study was to “…identify programs, whomthey serve, how they are supported, and how theyare evaluated and monitored by analyzing statelegislative and policy mandates and responses to asurvey” (Katsiyannis & Williams, 1998, p.277).They examined whether each state had alternativeschools and whether the state had an adopteddefinition, legislation, state policy/procedures,technical assistance, and compliance monitoring.In addition, the extent to which federal, state, andlocal monies were used to fund alternative schoolswas investigated. The authors of the legislativereview went on to suggest that alternative schoolsand programs would increase given statistics ondropout, school failure, delinquency, substanceabuse, and teenage pregnancy. Indeed, the rapid

growth in alternative schools over the past fewyears seems to confirm their prediction.

Given the increase in alternative programs andservices, a current review is necessary to updatethe status of policy and legislation across thenation. This is particularly important in light ofgeneral and special education reforms that havebeen instituted since that time (e.g. Individualswith Disabilities Education Act [IDEA, 1997]) andother policies such as zero tolerance, public schoolchoice, and no social promotion. In addition, the1996 review did not specifically address studentswith disabilities and their enrollment in alternativeschools or programs. Results from a recent na-tional survey estimates that approximately 12% ofall students in alternative schools are studentswith disabilities (Kleiner, Porch, & Farris, 2002).Although this percentage is not significantlydifferent from the overall percentage of specialeducation students with Individualized EducationPrograms (IEP) enrolled in all public schools duringthe 2000-2001 school year, the percentage ofspecial education students varied widely betweendistricts — ranging from 3% to 20% (Kleiner,Porch, & Farris, 2002). In addition, state-levelresearch conducted in Minnesota found thatstudents with emotional/behavioral disabilitieswere attending alternative programs at muchhigher proportions than in the traditional publicschools (Gorney & Ysseldyke, 1993). In Texas,“…twenty-one percent of Disciplinary AlternativeEducation Program (DAEP) removals involvedspecial education pupils, about three times theirproportion of the state enrollment” (Cortez &Montecel, 1999, p. 7). It is clear that alternativeschools are serving students with disabilities, butthe extent to which legislative policy addressesenrollment, exit, and educational processes andprocedures is not known.

The University of Minnesota’s AlternativeSchools Research Project is a federally fundedstudy designed to examine alternative schoolsacross the United States, particularly in relation to

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 3

students with disabilities. Documenting eachstate’s alternative education laws and policies isone way of better understanding the nature oftoday’s alternative schools. The purpose of thisreport is to provide an updated list of states thathave legislation or policies on alternative educa-tion and to examine what is included in the statelaws and policies. For example, do state lawsinclude language specific to a definition, funding,enrollment criteria, curriculum, and students withdisabilities? By documenting the current state lawsand policies for alternative education, the door isopened to studying the implications of the lawsand policies on practice. For example, by knowingwhether states are mandating alternative pro-grams for expelled or suspended students, re-searchers can begin to study the impetus drivinglegislative and policy decisions as well as theramifications of these decisions. Or, by document-ing the extent to which special education orstudents with disabilities are addressed in statealternative education laws, the implications forspecial education programming can be betterunderstood. Documentation of current laws andpolicies is a critical starting point. The informationgathered from this review will assist researchersand policymakers as they consider the role alter-native education is playing in the Americaneducational system.

MethodsProceduresTwo sources were used to obtain informationabout current legislation in each of the 50 statesand the District of Columbia. First, a Web-basedsearch was conducted of all state departments ofeducation Web sites. Second, results from a surveyconducted by the University of Minnesota’sAlternative Schools Research Project were com-piled and used to supplement and add to theexisting information gathered from the Web-based search. Information gathered from the twosources was combined and used as the basis ofthis review.

Web-based SearchState department of education Web sites weresearched for alternative school legislation andpolicy using the terms alternative education,schools and programs. The review occurred fromJanuary 2002 through September 2002. Informa-tion sought through the search included statelegislation — typically a senate or house bill, codeof regulations, resolutions, educational code, andlegislative statutes. Information gathered from theWeb search was systematically catalogued for usein summarizing each state’s alternative school lawsand policies.

The comprehensiveness of the alternativeeducation policy/legislation varies among thestates. Some states have legislation or policies thatprovide detailed descriptions of the state’s alterna-tives schools and policies. Others have short, andat times, ambiguous descriptions of the programsand the policies. When the alternative schoolpolicy is embedded within an educational statute,it is often less comprehensive than when there is aspecific statute addressing alternative education.States that have comprehensive legislation oftenhave a section titled “Alternative Education,Schools, or Programs” in the statute with specific

4

definitions for many, if not all, of the categoriesused for this report. Some states may havealternative school handbooks (developed by statedepartments of education or alternative schoolorganizations) that provide program guidelines,but these guidelines may not be specifically statedin law or in official policy. These kinds of docu-ments were not included in this review.

Survey FindingsA survey was distributed in June of 2002 to analternative school key informant in each of the 50states and the District of Columbia as part of theAlternative Schools Research Project. The surveyasked several questions about each state’s alterna-tive school experience and a specific questionaddressed the states’ laws and policies. The surveyhad a 78% (n=39) response rate. The questionpertinent to this report was: “Does your statehave legislation related to alternative programs/schools? If yes, please provide the legislativecitation (s), number or name of the statutes, code,or regulation.” Responses to the question werereviewed for each state and compared to theinformation gathered from the Web-based search.A review of information gathered from the twosources found consistency between the lawsposted on the Web sites and the policies andinformation provided by the key informants in thestates. In some cases, one of the sources providedmore detailed information than the other. In thosecases, the information was combined for presen-tation in this report.

Data AnalysisLegislation and policy for each state was examinedto determine the extent to which it addressedvarious topics. These topics were designatedprior to the review and were developed throughidentification of critical issues in alternativeeducation and from previous research (Katsiyannis& Williams, 1998; Lange & Sletten, 2002; Lehr &Lange, 2003). Information was organized accord-ing to the following topics or categories: alterna-tive school definition, funding, curriculum,enrollment criteria, staffing, and students withdisabilities.

Policy and legislation within each topic wascarefully examined and similar information wasgrouped together resulting in emerging themes.The unit of analysis was most often a sentenceor multi-sentence chunk of data. A state couldcontribute to more than one theme within a topic,but was not counted more than once in eachtheme area. Statements within topic areas andthemes were reviewed for continuity. The fre-quency and percentage of states that includedinformation on a particular topic was determinedand is listed in Table 1 on page 5. Themes arereported if more than six states1 included pertinentpolicy language.

It should be noted that this review provides asnapshot of legislation on alternative schools atone point in time. The fluid nature of changes inpolicy and legislation over time limits our findingsto those in place as of September 2002. Also,data collection on legislation and policy waslimited to two sources — Web-based search ofstate departments of education and survey resultsfrom 39 states. It is possible that the use of otherresources may have yielded additional relevantinformation.1 This reflects more than 12% of the total number of states with

legislation (n = 48); note the percentage is higher if it iscalculated using the total number of states within a particularcategory.

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 5

ResultsInformation was available on the existence oflegislation for all of the 50 states and the Districtof Columbia, either through the Web-basedsearch or through the Alternative Schools Re-search Project survey. Of the 50 states and Districtof Columbia, 48 or 94% had some type ofalternative school legislation addressing at leastone of the designated topics. This compares toonly 22 states with alternative school legislation or

Table 1. Percentage of States with Legislation Related to Various Topics

Topic and Definition Percent Number

Enrollment Criteria: Includes language focused on the kinds of criteriastudents must meet in order to enroll in an alternative school. 86 42

Definition: Includes language focused on how alternative schools weredefined and may have addressed the purpose, location, students served,or desired outcomes of programs. 71 34

Funding: Includes language focused on sources of funding foralternative schools. 71 34

Curriculum: Includes language focused on the kinds of academic skillstaught and teaching methods used in alternative schools. 69 33

Staffing: Includes language focused on required credentials, studentto staff ratio, selection of teachers for employment, provision of specializedservices, and other regulations. 60 29

Students with Disabilities: Includes language focused on students whoreceive special educational services, use of Individual Education Programs (IEP),entrance criteria, and least restrictive environment. 38 18

Note: Total number of states with legislation on alternative education, schools or programs = 48

official policies reported in the 1998 publication(Katsiyannis & Williams, 1998). Review of thelegislation indicated considerable variability in thetype of information delineated in statute, law, orpolicy. The percentage of states that includedinformation on each topic is provided in Table 1.Of those states with documented legislation orpolicies, 21% included information on all sixtopics. The summary of legislation available bystate is reported in Table 2 on pages 6 and 7.

6

Table 2. Alternative School Legislation or Policy Information Available by State (2002)

State Legislation Enrollment Definition Funding Curriculum Staffing Students w/Criteria Disabilities

AL x x x x x x

AK

AZ x x x x

AR x x x x x x

CA x x x x x x x

CO x x x x x

CT x x

DE x x x x x x x

DC x x x

FL x x x x

GA x x x x x

HI x x

ID x x x x x x

IL x x x x x x x

IN x x x x x x

IA x x x

KS x x x x x

KY x x x x x x x

LA x x x x x x

ME x x x x x

MD x x x x

MA x x x x x x

MI x x x

MN x x x x x x

MS x x x x x x

MO x x x x

MT

NE x x x x x

NV x x x x x

NH x x

NJ x x x x x

NM x x

NY x x x x

NC x x x x

ND x x x x

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 7

State Legislation Enrollment Definition Funding Curriculum Staffing Students w/Criteria Disabilities

OH x x x x x x

OK x x x x x x

OR x x x x x x x

PA x x x x x x x

RI x x

SC x x x x x x x

SD x x x x

TN x x x x x x x

TX x x x x x x x

UT x x

VT

VA x x x x x x x

WA x x x x x x

WV x x x x x x

WI x x x x x

WY x x x

A description of the designated topics andemerging themes within each topic is presentedbelow. Again, the amount of information availablein each state’s legislation or policy statements wasvariable.

Enrollment CriteriaForty-two (88%) states had laws or policies thataddressed enrollment criteria. The types of enroll-ment criteria for alternative schools varied greatly.Several states identified comprehensive criteria forenrollment in an alternative school or program.Four themes in the area of enrollment criteriaemerged from the law/policy review —

1. Theme: Students are admitted as a resultof suspension or expulsion. Thirty-four stateshad legislation indicating enrollment in alterna-tive schools occurred as a result or consequenceof an expulsion or suspension. In some states, astudent is required to be placed in an alterna-tive school or program if they are expelled or

suspended from their school. In other states,the alternative school enrollment was one ofthe choices the student could make afterexpulsion or suspension. Some states requireplacement in an alternative program if thesuspension or expulsion is a result of assault, afelony, or bringing a firearm or weapon toschool. Other states have alternative schoolsthat serve as an interim placement to assistwith the re-entry process after students returnfrom being out of school after suspension orexpulsion.

2. Theme: Students must meet some form ofat-risk criteria. Twenty-one states havelegislative or policy language requiring studentsto meet one or more at-risk criteria as a condi-tion of alternative program enrollment. Somestates have language that includes a compre-hensive list of at-risk guidelines. At-risk criteriatypically included: dropout status, truancy,physical abuse, substance abuse or possession,and homelessness.

8

3. Theme: Students have been disruptive inthe general education environment. Disrup-tive behavior in the general education environ-ment is criteria for enrollment in an alternativeschool as documented in the legislation of 14states. Language used in policy regarding thereferral process included —

• “Where the student’s presence poses…ongoing threat of disrupting the academicprocess, the student may be immediatelyremoved from the regular education curricu-lum…” (Pennsylvania Article XIX-C SS 1902-C ).

• “A school district may also reassign a pupilto an alternative educational program if thepupil refuses to comply with rules…”(Arizona Section 15-841 F).

• “Disruptive students typically derive littlebenefit from traditional school programs andmay benefit substantially by being trans-ferred from their current school into analternative public school program…” (Illinois105/ILCS 5/13A-1 (e)).

4. Theme: Students have been academicallyunsuccessful and would benefit from anontraditional school setting. Some stateshad policies that suggested alternative schoolswould benefit students who have been aca-demically unsuccessful in traditional settings(n=11). The term “academically unsuccessful”was typically defined as having been retained;having low test scores, failing grades, lowgrade-point average, or credit deficit; or notmeeting the state or district proficiency levels inreading, mathematics or writing. In general,students who were considered academicallyunsuccessful were described as not benefitingfrom the general education environment.

Some states also included legislation indicat-ing students could enroll in alternative schoolsas a result of court or agency referrals, or sexoffender violations or as a voluntary choice(fewer than six states in each category).

Alternative SchoolDefinitionOf particular interest was whether the states definedalternative education within the state’s statute orpolicies. Given the lack of clarity across the nation indefining alternative education, documenting howstates are defining alternative education can assist inunderstanding the current status of the entity.Thirty-four (71%) states with formal legislation havea definition for alternative education (sometimesreferred to as alternative program or school).Examples are provided below —

• “For the purpose of this section ‘alternativeeducation’ means the modification of theschool course of study and adoption of teach-ing methods, materials and techniques toprovide educationally for those pupils in gradessix through twelve who are unable to profitfrom the regular school course of study andenvironment” (Arizona Section 15-796).

• “For purposes of these rules, the followingdefinitions shall apply:... ‘Alternative program’means a class or environment establishedwithin the regular educational program anddesigned to accommodate specific studenteducational needs such as, but not limited to,work-related training; reading, mathematics orscience skills; communication skills; social skills;physical skills; employability skills; study skills;or life skills. ‘Alternative school’ means anenvironment established apart from the regulareducational program and that includes policiesand rules, staff, and resources designed toaccommodate student needs and to provide acomprehensive education consistent with thestudent learning goals and content standardsestablished by the school district or by theschool districts participating in a consortium.Students attend by choice” (Iowa 281-12.2(256).

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 9

• “The Alternative Education Programs supportedby this legislation shall: (1) provide accreditedalternative education during the regular schoolyear (five days per week, eight hours per day)for students who have dropped out of middleor high school…” (Massachusetts HB 3272).

Oftentimes, the alternative setting was definedby circumstances or characteristics of the studentpopulation it was designed to serve. When thedefinitions are reviewed, four themes emergedthat assist in understanding legislation related todefining alternative education —

1. Theme: Alternative education includesschools or programs in nontraditionalsettings separate from the general educa-tion classroom. Twenty-five states had legisla-tion/policy stating alternative schools arenontraditional settings that are separate fromthe general education classroom. Non-tradi-tional settings included a separate building onor off schools grounds, school within a school,or a setting other than student’s regular class-room.

2. Theme: Alternative schools/programs servestudents who are at risk of school failure.Oftentimes, definitions of alternative schoolsaddressed the population served in thesesettings. For example, 17 states had definitionsthat included policy stating that alternativeschools are for at-risk students. Studentsconsidered “at risk of school failure” typicallyincluded dropouts, or those at risk of droppingout, youth who are pregnant or parenting, andthose who do not thrive or succeed in thetraditional school setting.

3. Theme: Alternative schools/programs servestudents who are disruptive or havebehavior problems. Eleven states had policiesstating that alternative schools serve studentswho are disruptive or have behavior problemswithin general education. Legislation within thistheme stated alternative schools are settingsintended to segregate potentially dangerousstudents and/or are for students who interferewith others’ learning. Language used in legisla-tion to describe this theme includes —

• “…an alternative school program for, butnot limited to, the following categories orcompulsory-school-age students:…(b) Anycompulsory-school-age child referred to suchalternative school based upon a documentedneed for placement in the alternative schoolprogram by the parent, legal guardian ofsuch child due to disciplinary programs…”(Mississippi Code 37-13-92).

• “Any applicant’s program applying for fundsunder this article, which program is imple-mented by a school district, an area voca-tional-technical school, a group of schooldistricts or an intermediate unit, whichremoves disruptive students from the regularschool programs in order to provide thosestudents with a sound education course ofstudy and counseling designed to modifydisruptive behavior and return students to aregular school curriculum” (PennsylvaniaSchool Code Article XIX-C (Act 30 of 1997Section 1901-C)).

4. Theme: Alternative schools/programs servestudents who have been suspended orexpelled. States also including languagespecifically indicating alternative education isfor suspended or expelled students (n=8).Examples include the following —

• “…an alternative school program for, butnot limited to, the following categories ofcompulsory-school-age students: (a) Any

10

compulsory-school-age child who has beensuspended for more than ten (10) days orexpelled from schools…” (Mississippi Code37-13-92),

• “This component will serve primarily second-ary school students, including but not limitedto: youngsters who have been expelled fromregular school…” (Delaware Code T-14, SS1604).

Funding SourcesThirty-two states have a policy or language in thelaw that addresses alternative education funding.Language in the state laws and policies rangedfrom very general to detailed explanations withsome states delineating extensive funding plans.The sources of funding fell into four areas: federal,state, and local monies; and grant money.Oftentimes, the language on funding indicatedthat the alternative schools could receive moneyfrom more than one of these sources. It should benoted that the information compiled on fundingwas limited to what was available in policy directlyrelated to alternative schools —

1. Theme: Alternative schools/programsreceive state funds. Information gatheredfrom legislation suggests that the primarysource of funding for alternative schools comesfrom the state (n=30). One example of legisla-tion/policy is —

• “Eligibility to receive general State aid. Inorder to receive general State aid, alternativelearning opportunities programs must meetthe requirements for claiming general Stateaid…” (Illinois 105 ILCS 5 Section 13B-50).

2. Theme: Alternative schools/programsreceive local funds. Fewer states had policy/legislation suggesting funding for alternativeschools was determined at the local level (n=8).Examples include —

• “The local board of education shall providea 25 percent match of all funds for alterna-tive school programs” (Code of Alabama 41-15b-2.2).

• “Any funds received by a local school districtunder this regulation may only be expendedfor eligible ALE programs” (Arkansas Depart-ment of Education Rules and RegulationsADE 145 6.01).

3. Theme: Alternative schools/programsreceive support from grants or privatecontracts. Seven states had policy/legislationstating that a portion of funding for alternativeschools shall come from grants (e.g. SafeSchools Education grant, regional juvenileservice grant and foundation grants);oftentimes the specific source of these grantmonies was not stated —

• “Alternative Approaches grants for alterna-tive education shall be limited to middlegrade level alternative schools provided by aschool district and to secondary grade levelprograms provided pursuant to a contractwith a nonprofit organization” (OklahomaStatutes Section 70-1210.562).

• “Supplemental funding. An alternativelearning opportunity program may receivefederal, State, and local grants, gifts, andfoundation grants to support the program”(Illinois 105 ILCS Section 13B-40.50).

4. Theme: Alternative schools/programsreceive money from federal sources. Somestates had policy/legislation designating federalmonies for alternative schools (n=6). Themajority of references to federal funding alsoreferred to other sources of funding —

• “A school district shall allocate to an alter-native school program the same per studentexpenditure to include federal, state, andlocal funds…” (South Carolina Statute Title59 Article 13 Section 59-63-1380).

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 11

Curriculum/EducationalProgramLegislation or policies that included languageabout the curriculum within alternative schoolswas evident in 33 states. Again, the languageaddressing curriculum requirements within alter-native schools varied in the degree to which it wascomprehensive. Oftentimes guidelines werespecifically stated regarding curriculum. Therequired curriculum differed widely across states.For example, some legislation addressed requiredacademic subjects, others addressed disciplineprocedures, and some talked about the availabilityof social services in alternative schools. Fourthemes emerged when the states’ laws werereviewed in the area of curriculum —

1. Theme: Basic academic skills, a core curricu-lum, and state content standards should beincluded in the instructional program.Twenty-eight states had policy stating thatcurriculum should consist of “Core CurriculumContent Standards” or standards adopted bythe state. Many states had language thatindicated students must complete state gradua-tion requirements.

2. Theme: Social services should be providedin alternative schools/programs. Twelvestates had legislation or policy stating thatsocial services must or should be available tostudents in alternative schools. Social serviceswere typically defined as counseling, life skills,and social skills. Examples of policy languageincluded —

• “The plan submitted by each local board ofeducation shall outline the educationalservices which shall be available to each childassigned to the short-term or long-termprograms. Those services shall include butare not limited to, all of the following:Counseling, including sessions on conflictresolution. Social skills development” (Ala-bama Section 41-15B-2.2).

• “The Alternative Education Program sup-ported by this legislation shall…provide acomprehensive array of socialservices…provide general counseling ser-vices…” (Massachusetts HB 3272).

3. Theme: Community-based learning shouldbe included in curriculum. Policy languageregarding work or community-based learningrequirements was apparent in 10 states. Issuesthat were addressed included multi-disciplinarywork-based learning and community service.Examples of law or policy language are listedbelow —

• “A combination of classroom instruction andon-the-job training. Instruction in practicalwork values and specific vocational skills thatreflect labor market demand” (CaliforniaEducation Code Section 52900).

• “The programs and services of a center mustfocus on…applied learning opportunities,trade and vocational skills, work basedlearning opportunities, work service, youthservice to the community…” (MinnesotaStatute 123A.06).

4. Theme: The educational program shouldinclude an emphasis on individual instruc-tion. States also included legislative or policylanguage requiring an individual instructionplan for each student (n=9). Some statesreferred to an Individualized Program Plan (IPP)or Individual Instruction Plan (IIP), while othersreferred to having a written plan for eachstudent — both intended to individualizeinstruction. Examples include —

• “An Individualized Program Plan for eachstudent enrolled in the program; Individual-ized instruction to students that address theCore Curriculum Content Standards…”(New Jersey Annotated Code 6A:16-8.2 a).

• “The minimum guidelines shall require, at aminimum, the formulation of an individualinstruction plan for each student referred tothe alternative school program…” (Missis-sippi Code Annotated Section 37-13-92 (7)).

12

StaffingTwenty-nine (60%) states include legislativeor policy language on staffing at alternativeschools. One theme in the area of staffingemerged from the law/policy and several otherpolicies are noted —

1. Theme: Teachers must be certified orcomply with state teaching standards.Sixteen states have legislative or policy lan-guage stating alternative school teachers mustbe certified or comply with state standards.One example is —

• “A classroom teacher in an alternative‘school’ shall qualify on the basis of acertificate valid for classroom teaching”(Kentucky 704 KAR 20:165(14)).

There was no mention of the need for teachersto be certified in particular subject areas or gradelevels in the legislation related to alternativeschools. West Virginia is an example of a statewith very comprehensive legislation regardingstaffing —

• “Personnel. a. Selection Criteria - It is theresponsibility of the county board of educa-tion to select the most qualified applicants toimplement the alternative education pro-gram. Classroom teachers shall be selectedon the basis of the teacher’s demonstrationof competence in meeting the followingstandards: A. any West Virginia professionalteaching certificate, B. ability to effectpositive behavior in disruptive students, C.effective leadership and/or mentoring skills inworking with youth, D. successful experiencein providing education to troubled or disrup-tive youth, E. specialized training or experi-ence in nontraditional programs, F. special-ized training in behavior management skills.Licensure. a. West Virginia ProfessionalTeaching Certificate - A teacher assigned todeliver the academic subjects within analternative education program must possess

a West Virginia professional teaching certifi-cate in any area. b. Temporary Authorization- A Temporary Authorization valid for oneyear shall be granted to the successfulcandidate for the alternative educationprogram position (s). The employing countysuperintendent must verify that the applicantpossesses the competencies identified inSection 6.1.9a. The Temporary Authorizationmay be renewed each year based on theapplicants continued employment in analternative education program” (WestVirginia Board of Education Legislative RuleTitle 126-20-6.1.9 to 6.1.11).

A small number of state policies are worthnoting although they did not warrant a thematiccategory. For example, some states specified amaximum student-to-teacher ratio in alternativeschools (ranged from 12:1 to 15:1). The followingare miscellaneous excerpts from legislation refer-ring to alternative school staffing —

• “Teachers employed in alternative schoolsestablished pursuant to this Section shall beselected from regularly employed teacherswho volunteer” (Louisiana RS 17:100.5C.(1).

• “The board may not require a person em-ployed as a teacher in an alternative educa-tion program under Section 37.008 or ajuvenile justice alternative education pro-gram under Section 37.011 for at least threeyears to complete an alternative educatorcertification program adopted under thissection before taking the appropriate certifi-cation examination” (Texas SB 998).

• “Currently, a teacher in an alternativeeducation program (AEP) which is notlocated on a regular school campus in notrequired to hold a teachers certificate” (TexasSB 998).

• “A private alternative education programthat is registered with the Department ofEducation is not required to employ onlylicensed teachers or administrators” (OregonRevised Statute 336.631 (3).

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 13

• “Demonstrate that teaching faculty havebeen selected on the basis of a record ofsuccessful work with at-risk students orpersonal and educational factors that qualifythem for work with at-risk students; …in-clude counseling and social services compo-nents with the provision that providers ofservices are not required to be certified asschool counselors” (Oklahoma SS70-1210.568 (5, 10).

Students With DisabilitiesLegislative and policy language concerningstudents with disabilities was found to be the leastrepresented from the categories. Eighteen (38%)states with formal laws or policies include lan-guage about students with disabilities. Thelanguage reviewed does not include IDEA 97legislation unless stated in context of policy andlegislation on alternative schools. Languagereviewed includes legislation that specificallyaddresses students with disabilities and alternativeschools. One main theme emerged from thereview —

1. Theme: Alternative schools must complywith all state laws and (federal) constitu-tional provisions regarding students withdisabilities. Fourteen states have legislative orpolicy language stating alternative schools mustcomply with all state and federal laws regardingstudents with disabilities. Language within thiscategory addressed IDEA requirements fordiscipline and placement, due process, andserving students in the least restrictive environ-ment. Examples include —

• “Least restrictive environment means theeducational setting in which the child oryouth with a disability can learn effectively,based upon unique needs and capabilities,and interact with similar age peers who arenot disabled” (Kentucky, 707 KAR 1:220).

• “All laws, rules, and regulations shall befollowed with children eligible for specialeducation. If a change of placement is made,due process procedures are mandated”(Tennessee State Board of Education Rule0520-1-2-09 (d)).

• “Special Education — County boards ofeducation shall comply with applicable stateand federal laws and regulations in theeducation of exceptional students placed inalternative education programs” (WestVirginia Board of Education Legislative RuleTitle 126 Series 20-6.1.8).

A few states addressed a variety of issuesrelated to students with disabilities althoughthey did not fall into a thematic category. Forexample, Texas legislation addresses admissionsand criteria —

• “The Placement of a student with a disabilitywho receives special education services may bemade only by a duly constituted admission,review, and dismissal committee. A studentwith a disability who receives special educationservices may not be placed in alternativeeducation programs solely for educationalpurposes if the student does not also meet thecriteria for alternative placement in Section37.006(a) and 37.007(a).” (Senate Bill 155Chapter 37.004).

Colorado has legislation that suggests an“alternative education campus” can include avariety of public schools including settings thatprimarily serve students with disabilities —

• “On or before September 1, 2002, the stateboard shall adopt rules specifying the criteriaand application process for a school to bedesignated an alternative education campus.Such rules shall include but not be limited to:…(B) Serving a student population, more thanninety-five percent of whom have an individualeducation program pursuant to section 22-20-108…” (Colorado SB 02-094 Section 22-7-604.5 VI.B).

14

Discussion of KeyFindings andAssociated IssuesNearly all states have legislation or policies regard-ing alternative education. The kind of topicsaddressed in the state laws and policies varies.Most states surveyed addressed criteria for enroll-ment (90%), and almost three-quarters includedinformation defining alternative education,schools or programs, or about funding, curricu-lum, and staffing. Just over a third of the stateswith formal legislation or policies included specificlanguage regarding the enrollment or educationof students with disabilities in alternative schools.The following discussion summarizes key findingsand raises additional questions to address.

Increase in States WithLaws or PoliciesThe number of states we found to have laws orpolicies on alternative education (n = 48) isconsiderably higher than what Katsiyannis &Williams reported in 1998 (22 states based upon a1996 survey; 38 states responding). The resultsfrom this study indicate an increase in the atten-tion paid to alternative education at the statelevel. This is not surprising given the results fromrecent studies that reported considerable increasesin the number of students enrolled in alternativeschools or programs (Kleiner, Porch & Ferris, 2002;Lehr & Lange, 2002). However, reasons for theincreases in both enrollment and in legislation areunclear. Has the legislation opened the gates toalternative schools? Or, have the state legislaturesresponded to an existing and increasing interest inproviding alternative education by formulatinglaws and policies? The increase also raises ques-tions about the role various school reform effortsare having on students at-risk for school failure.

Are students placed in alternative educationsettings to assist schools in their efforts to help allstudents meet state standards or are studentsremoved from traditional settings and placed inalternative schools for other reasons?

Alternative EducationDefinitionMost of the states with formal laws or policiesdefined alternative schools as being for at-riskstudents who are served in settings separate fromthe general education classroom. This is similar tothe definition provided by the U.S. Department ofEducation and suggests that there is some con-sensus on the definition in this area. However,the laws and policies reviewed also suggest that“non-traditional settings” can range from aseparately-funded program with a separate facilityto a classroom set aside for disruptive students.Variation in definition allows flexibility in design.These programs must be evaluated to determinespecific characteristics that are conducive tostudent success.

Curriculum RequirementsMore than half of the states had policy languageconcerning curriculum in alternative schools. Mostof those required alternative schools to follow thestate standards. However, more than a third of thestates had no language concerning curriculum. Itis unclear if they are required to follow theirschool district curriculum, the state standards, or ifthey can implement their own curriculum require-ments. The lack of specificity in state laws andpolicies for a third of the states should be furtherexamined to determine the level of autonomygiven to the alternative schools and if that is theintent of the states’ legislative and administrativeleaders.

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 15

Number of States WithExpulsion/Suspension asCriteriaThe legislative/policy review suggests that (basedon enrollment criteria numbers) alternative schoolsmay be used more and more as a setting forstudents who have been suspended/expelled,meet at-risk criteria, and are disruptive in theclassroom. If this is the case, current statistics ondropout, suspension and expulsion rates suggeststhat the demand for alternative schools willcontinue (Children’s Defense Fund, 2000; NationalCenter for Education Statistics, 2002; Skiba &Knesting, 2002). Again, the use of expulsion orsuspension as criteria for enrollment in alternativeschools necessitates questions about whetheralternative education will or is being used as a“holding tank” for those who cause disruptions inthe traditional schools, or if they are educationalentities in their own right.

Funding Sources andImplications for AlternativeEducationAlternative schools receive their funding from avariety of sources including state and local dollars,federal dollars, and grant monies (e.g. Safe andDrug Free Schools) and community-based organi-zations (Katsiyannis & Williams, 1998; Lehr &Lange, 2003). Although legislation most oftenreferred to state level funding for alternativeschools, this review did not reveal a consistentmechanism across states for funding. This sug-gests that alternative schools may be subject tochanging economic conditions. Findings frominterviews with state directors of special educationand additional survey questions indicated thatobtaining adequate funding for alternativeeducation was a significant challenge and concern(Lehr & Lange, 2003; Lehr, 2003). With 40% of

states with formal legislation or policies notaddressing funding, there may be issues in thefuture as state and local budgets are stressed forsufficient funds for their general educationprograms.

Staffing RequirementsApproximately half of the states with a formalalternative education law or policy includedlanguage about staffing. Most of these requiredalternative schools or programs to have certifiedteachers or to comply with the state’s staffingstandards. Though half did not have this in policyor law, it may be that in some states alternativeschools’ staffing requirements are covered under amore global staffing policy. Therefore, it is difficultto ascertain the significance of this finding.

Policies on StudentsWith DisabilitiesApproximately one-third of the states had specificlanguage, other than language referring to theIndividuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)concerning students with disabilities. Again, thismay not be unusual if states have blanket policiesthat cover students with disabilities. It is, however,noteworthy given the role special education mayplay as an at-risk characteristic and the confusionthat may result if alternative programs do nothave clear guidance for serving students withdisabilities. Interviews with state directors ofspecial education indicated concerns with thespecial education processes and procedures inplace at alternative schools for students withdisabilities. Although alternative schools weregenerally viewed as another educational optionavailable to students with disabilities, there werequestions about enrollment procedures, provisionof quality services, implementation of the IEP, andavailability of special education (Lehr & Lange,2003).

16

Implications for FuturePolicy and PracticeThe review of the states’ laws and policies raisessome questions about the intent of the legislationand the extent to which alternative school practiceis meeting the desired outcomes of state laws andpolicies. Further investigation is also required todetermine the degree to which policy matchespractice. This review provides a comprehensivepicture of state policy and legislation at this pointin time. However, this review does not provide anindication of effectiveness of alternative educationfor students who are attending these settings.

Examination of policy leads one to consider therole alternative education is playing in the largercontext of the American education system. Thefocus and intent of alternative education appearsto be changing and becomes more evident whenalternative schools are viewed from an historicalperspective. Alternative schools gained popularityin the late 1960s and 1970s and largely originatedfrom a drive to create more innovative schoolswith a progressive orientation (Young, 1990). Thenumber of alternative schools grew significantlyduring the 1970s. Both Raywid (1981) and Young(1990) suggest that alternative schools becamemore conservative and remedial in the 1980s andbegan serving more students who were disruptiveor failing in their home schools. By 1987, over 15states had passed legislation to increase alterna-tive education options, and alternative educationprograms were serving a variety of students,including violent or chronically disruptive youth,students at risk of dropout, low achieving stu-dents, and students from varied socioeconomicand ethnic backgrounds (Garrison, 1987;Harrington, 1994).

During the 1990s there was an increase inpublic attention focused on school violence,dropout rates, and behavior problems in ournation’s public schools. This, in part, has beeninfluenced by highly publicized school violence

incidents such as those experienced at ColumbineHigh School in Colorado and Thurston HighSchool in Oregon that occurred in the late 1990s.Perhaps as a result, there has been a renewedinterest in alternative settings that focus onchronically disruptive, suspended and expelledstudents. This appears to have led to a growth instate-level organization and legislative/policy onalternative schools. When viewed within thehistorical context, the 2002 state law and policyreview raises questions about what is drivingchanges in alternative education. Is the underlyingintent of alternative education legislation to meetthe needs of disenfranchised students, or to assisttraditional public schools in behavior manage-ment? What is the role alternative education haswithin the larger context of public school choiceand options? How best do we meet the needs ofthose who cause disruption within the publicschools and is that the only role of alternativeeducation? What are the outcomes and expecta-tions for students who attend these schools?

It should be noted that a few of the states havepassed extensive alternative education legislationthat is based upon providing a variety of optionsfor students who are at risk of school failure (e.g.California, Idaho, Iowa, and Minnesota). Thesestates have a different focus than many of thestates where the criteria, at this point in thehistory of alternative school, appears to be moreplacement oriented and disciplinary in nature.Parents, educators, researchers and policymakersmust ask what the best approach to alternativeeducation is for students who are not succeedingin the traditional system. The answer to thisquestion must inform policy and efforts to estab-lish effective alternative schools that facilitatepositive outcomes for students at risk with andwithout disabilities. This state policy and legislativereview provides a point of reference to begin andinform these discussions at the national, state,and local level as more and more students areenrolled in alternative schools and programs andmore and more programs begin operation.

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 17

ReferencesChildren’s Defense Fund (2002).

www.childrensdefense.org/keyfacts.htm

Cortez, A. & Montecel, M.R. (1999). Disciplinaryalternative education programs in Texas -What is known; What is needed. RetrievedApril 19, 2002 from Intercultural Develop-ment Research Association (IDRA) database,http://www.idra.org/index.htm.

Garrison, R.W. (1987). Alternative Schools fordisruptive youth: NSSC resource paper (ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. ED 293198). Malibu, CA: National Schools SafetyCenter, Pepperdine University.

Gorney, D.J., & Ysseldyke, J. (1993). Students withdisabilities use of various options to accessalternative schools and area learning centers.Special Services in the Schools, 7(1), 125-143.

Harrington, L.D. (1994) Hanging onto hope.American School Board Journal, 181(12),16-21.

Katsiyannis, A. & Williams, B. (1998). A nationalsurvey of state initiatives on alternativeeducation. Remedial and Special Education.19(5). 276-284.

Kellmayer, J. (1995). How to establish an alterna-tive school. Thousand Oaks, CA: CorwinPress.

Kleiner, B., Porch, R., & Farris, E. (2002). Publicalternative schools and programs for studentsat risk of educational failure: 2000-01 (NCES2002-04). Washington, DC: U.S. Departmentof Education, National Center for EducationStatistics.

Lange, C.M. & Sletten, S.J. (2002). Alternativeeducation: A brief history and synthesis.Alexandria, VA: Project Forum at NationalAssociation of State Directors of SpecialEducation.

Lehr, C.A.& Lange, C.M. (2003). Alternativeschools and students they serve: Perceptionsof state directors of special education. PolicyResearch Brief, 14(1). Minneapolis, MN:Institute on Community Integration, Researchand Training Center on Community Living.

Lehr, C.A. (2003). [Alternative Schools ResearchProject Survey Results]. Unpublished rawdata.

National Center for Education Statistics (2000).Dropout rates in the United States: 1999(NCES 2001022). Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Education, Offices of Researchand Improvement.

Raywid, M.A. (1981). The first decade of publicschool alternatives. Phi Delta Kappan, 62 (8),551-553.

Skiba, R.J. & Knesting, K. (2002). Zero tolerance,zero evidence: An analysis of schooldisciplinary practice. In R.J. Skiba & G.G.Noam (Eds.) New directions for youthdevelopment (pp.17-43). San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center forEducational Statistics (2002). Characteristicsof the 100 largest public elementary andsecondary school districts in the UnitedStates: 2000-01 (NCES 2002-351). Washing-ton DC: Author.

Young, T. (1990). Public alternative education:Options and choice for today’s schools. NewYork, NY: Teachers College Press.

18

AppendixPolicy and LegislativeCitations by StateWeb site used in locating policy/legislation for allstates: http://www.prairienet.org/~scruffy/f.htm

AlabamaAlabama Law can be found athttp://www.legislature.state.al.us

Code of Alabama:41-15B-202a (iii-viii); 16-1-24.3

Senate Bill 196

AlaskaNo alternative education legislation found

ArizonaArizona Law can be found athttp://www.azleg.state.az.us

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS): 15-797; 15-796B;15-796C; 15-841E; 15-308

ArkansasArkansas Law can be found athttp://www.arkleg.state.ar.us

Arkansas Code Annotated (Ark. Code Ann.):6-18-508; 6-18-509; 6-20-323; 6-15-1005

Arkansas Department of Education Rules andRegulations (ADE) 145 1-3

CaliforniaCalifornia Law can be found athttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov

California Education Codes can be found athttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

California Education Code Sections: 52900;56366.9; 58503; 58550-58562; 58562

ColoradoColorado Law can be found athttp://www.state.co.us/gov_dir/stateleg.html

Senate Bill 02-94; 94-22-7-601

Colorado Revised Statutes 22-33-203

ConnecticutConnecticut Law can be found athttp://www.cga.state.ct.us

Senate Bill 304

DelawareDelaware Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.de.us/Legislature.nsf?Open

Delaware Code, Title-14, Section 1604

Department of Education Regulation 610

Senate Bill 83

District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Law can be found athttp://198.187.128.12/dc lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=fs-main.htm&2.0

Bill B14-0084, “Attendance and SchoolSafety Act of 2001”

District of Columbia Code 38-233

FloridaFlorida Law can be found athttp://www.leg.state.fl.us

Florida State Annotated Code Section: 228.041;230.231; 230.02; 230.023; 230.2316;

GeorgiaGeorgia Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.ga.us

Georgia Administrative Code Annotated:20-2-751.1; 160-1-4-118

House Bill 1187 and 114

Georgia Legislative Code 160-4-8-12

HawaiiHawaii Law can be found athttp://www.capitol.hawaii.gov

House Bill 1229

Hawaii Revised Statute 298.11

IdahoIdaho Law can be found athttp://www2.state.id.us/legislat/legislat.html

Idaho Administrative Code 110

Idaho Code 33-1002

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 19

IllinoisIllinois Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.il.us

105 ILCS 5/13A, B

IndianaIndiana Law can be found at http://www.in.gov/legislative

Indiana Administrative Code can be found athttp://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/title511.html

Indiana Code: IC 20-10.1-4.6-1 through IC 21-3-11-9

State Board of Education Rules: 511 IAC 1-9-1through 511 IAC 1-9-3

Senate Bill 422

IowaIowa Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.ia.us

Iowa Administrative Code 281-12.2(256)

Iowa Code Section 280.19

KansasKansas Law can be found athttp://www.kslegislature.org

Kansas Statute Number: 72-9201; 72-991

KentuckyKentucky Law can be found athttp://www.lrc.state.ky.us/home.htm

Kentucky Administrative Regulation (KAR): 702KAR 7:125; 703 KAR 4:080; 704 KAR 3:303; 704KAR 3:305; 704 KAR 7:070; 704 KAR 20:165;707 KAR 1:220

Kentucky Revised Statute (KRS): KRS 158.44; KRS158.060; KRS 158.070; KRS 159:051; KRS160.345; KRS 161.020

LouisianaLouisiana Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.la.us

Louisiana Revised Statutes: 17:100.1; 17:100.5;17:416.2; 17:7.6

House Bill 21

MaineMaine Law can be found athttp://janus.state.me.us/legis

Maine Statutes: Title 20-A Part 3 Chapter 211Subchapter 3: 5104-A; Title 20-A Part 7 Chapter601: 115002-A; Title 20-A Part 3 Chapter 207-ASubchapter 3: 4727

Maine Administrative Code 05-011 Chapter 128Section 13

MarylandMaryland Law can be found athttp://mlis.state.md.us

Maryland Code Annotated 7-305.1

MassachusettsMassachusetts Law can be found athttp://www.state.ma.us/legis/legis.htm

House Bill 3272

MichiganMichigan Law can be found athttp://www.michiganlegislature.org

Michigan Compiled Law (MCL): 380.1310;380.1311; 388.1625

MinnesotaMinnesota Law can be found athttp://www.leg.state.mn.us

Minnesota Alternative School Handbook can befound at http://cfl.state.mn.us/LOD/alp/Handbook.pdf

Minnesota Statutes: 123A.05; 123A.06; 124D.68;126C.05

MississippiMississippi Law can be found athttp://www.ls.state.ms.us

Mississippi Code Annotated Section: 37-13-92;37-13-93; 37-19-92; 37-19-22

MissouriMissouri Law can be found athttp://www.moga.state.mo.us

Missouri Revised Statutes: 167.164; 167.322;167.330; 167.332; 167.335

Code of State Regulations (CSR) 50-350.020 (A)

20

MontanaMontana Law can be found athttp://leg.state.mt.us/css/default.asp

No legislation on alternative education found.

NebraskaNebraska Law can be found athttp://www.unicam.state.ne.us

Nebraska Statutory Authority Sections: 79-209;79-266; 79-318; 79-758

Nebraska Administrative Code 92-17

NevadaNevada Law can be found athttp://www.leg.state.nv.us/

Assembly Bill Number 89

Amendment Number 1229

Nevada Revised Statute (NRS): 392.4675

New HampshireNew Hampshire Law can be found athttp://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie

New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated15-193:13

New JerseyNew Jersey Law can be found athttp://www.njleg.state.nj.us

New Jersey Annotated Code 6A:16-8.1 through 3

New MexicoNew Mexico Law can be found athttp://legis.state.nm.us

New Mexico State Annotated Code: 22-5-4.7; 33-12-5

New YorkNew York Law can be found athttp://assembly.state.ny.us

8 NYCRR Section 100.7 (h) (i)

North CarolinaNorth Carolina Law can be found athttp://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Statutes/Statutes.html

House Bill 168

Senate Bill 71; 1099

General Statute 115C-105.46-48

SBE Policy HSP-Q-001

North DakotaNorth Dakota Law can be found athttp://www.state.nd.us/lr/

Article 67-16-01

OhioOhio Law can be found athttp://www.legislature.state.oh.us

Ohio Revised Annotated Code 3313.533

OklahomaOklahoma Law can be found athttp://www.lsb.state.ok.us

Oklahoma Statutes Sections: 70-1210.561; 70-1210.562; 70-1210.565; 70-1210.567; 70-1210.568

OregonOregon Law can be found athttp://www.leg.state.or.us

Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS): 336.615-665;329.485 (4)(5); 339.250 (9)(10)

Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR): 581-022-1350; 581-021-0072; 581-021-0071

PennsylvaniaPennsylvania Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.pa.us

Article XIX-C (Act 30 of 1999)

Rhode IslandRhode Island Law can be found athttp://www.state.ri.us

Senate Bill 0422

South CarolinaSouth Carolina Law can be found athttp://www.lpitr.state.sc.us

South Carolina Statute Title 59 Article 13 Section59-63-1300 to 59-63-1400

Alternative Schools Policy and Legislation Across the United States • Report #1 21

South DakotaSouth Dakota Law can be found athttp://legis.state.sd.us/index.cfm

South Dakota Administrative Rule: 24:03:02:01;24:03:02:01.02

House Bill 1237

TennesseeTennessee Law can be found athttp://www.legislature.state.tn.us

Tennessee Code Annotated (TCA) 49-6-3402

State Board of Education Rules 0520-1-2-.09

TexasTexas Law can be found athttp://www.capitol.state.tx.us

Texas Annotated Code (TAC): 19 TAC 1901011

Texas Education Code (TEC): 29.081; 37

Senate Bill 133; 189

UtahUtah Law can be found athttp://www.le.state.ut.us

Utah Code: 53A33-904; 53A-11-907; 53A-17a-141

VermontVermont Law can be found athttp://www.hslda.org/legislation/state/VT/default.asp

No legislation on alternative education found

VirginiaVirginia Law can be found athttp://legis.state.va.us

Code of Virginia Section: 22.1-209.1:2; 22.1-276.01; 22.1-277.1; 22.1-254; 22.1-266

WashingtonWashington Law can be found athttp://www.leg.wa.gov/wsladm/default.htm

Washington Annotated Code 392-121-182

Senate Bill 6094

House Bill 1646

West VirginiaWest Virginia Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.wv.us/legishp.html

Senate Bill 4

West Virginia Board of Education Legislative RuleTitle 126 Series 20

WisconsinWisconsin Law can be found athttp://www.legis.state.wi.us

Wisconsin Statutes: 115.28; 118.153; 121.00;121.02

Wisconsin Administrative Code: s. PI 3.03; s.PI 8.01

WyomingWyoming Law can be found athttp://legisweb.state.wy.us

Wyoming State Annotated Code: 21-13-318;21-4-305