Special Education Reform in Light of Select State and Federal Court Decisions

Abstract

In this study, I define and analyze three conflicting positions that constitute the Regular Education Initiative in light of 24 federal and state court decisions. These cases either have established legal precedents in the field of special education law or have raised issues that educators must consider when proposing changes within an educational setting that is itself subject to numerous legal constraints. I conclude that compared to its counterparts, the “Little Change Model” complies with more of these standards (e.g., due process, limited funding, equal access, duplication of services, and quality of education). Of the two remaining positions, the “Extreme Change Model,” which includes the concept known as “full inclusion,” appears to be the least compliant.