History Of Special Education Research Articles

The Legal History of Special Education

ABSTRACT Children and youth with disabilities have historically received unequal treatment in the public education system. In the early 20th century, the enactment of compulsory attendance laws in the states began to change the educational opportunities for these students. Opportunities for admittance to public schools were greater, but many students nevertheless did not receive an effective or appropriate education. Beginning in the late 1960s and early 1970s, parents and advocates for students with disabilities began to use the courts in an attempt to force states to provide an equal educational opportunity for these students. These efforts were very successful and eventually led to the passage of federal legislation to ensure these rights. The purpose of this article is to examine the legal history of special education. We will examine these early efforts to ensure a free appropriate education for students with disabilities up to and including the enactment of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997.

“To Draw Out the Effort of His Mind”

The education of children with retardation in early-nineteenth-century America is little understood by historians and special educators. Most often, it is assumed that little schooling was possible until the 1840s, with the rise of state-funded institutions. In addition, the perspective of students' families is rarely considered by historians of special education. This paper details the educational experiences of one child, Thomas Cameron (1806–1870), and his family, based on the Cameron family's extensive correspondence. (Thomas Cameron is believed to have had mental retardation.) He was educated in a variety of settings, including John Churchill Rudd's New Jersey school, and the American Literary, Scientific and Military Academy of Alden Partridge. Both Rudd and Partridge adapted their usual methods and curricula to Cameron's needs, and attained some success. This study finds that the Southern planter class offered an encouraging environment to a child with a disability. It also points to the possibilities of a manuscript-based, biographical approach in the history of special education.

The Enrichment Perspective

The Enrichment Perspective, formulated in Norway as an alternative or supplementary approach to the diagnostic-therapeutic special education model, is described. the enrichment Perspective is a strengths- and ability-based model that involves an assessment of what the child can do as well as what the school can do, and uses this information as the point of departure in creating or adapting learning environments. in addition, the author provides a brief history of special education in europe, describes some illustrative examples of the enrichment perspective, and addresses several potential barriers to the implementation of the Enrichment perspective.

The Mentally Ill Child Grows Up: Transitions to the World of Work

The impetus for this book came from the author's experiences (1) as a director of programs for emotionally disturbed children, adolescents, and adults, and (2) in researching and writing about transitions to employment for individuals with mental illness. The book begins with an overview of the problems of educating individuals with mental illness; a brief commentary on the mentally ill adolescent is given. The history of special education from 1958 onward and the tremendous effect of Children With Disabilities Public Law 94-142 on improving the services for and recognizing the difficulties of teaching the emotionally handicapped are elucidated. The laws that govern and provide special programs for the handicapped are listed and discussed as are some of the problems faced when a handicapped adolescent acquires and tries to retain a job. Some of the problems faced in coordinating the different programs available for the handicapped and the characteristics of successful

Inclusion: Multiple perspectives

The history of special education and the treatment of persons with disabilities has been involved at least as much with social movements as with education (Repp, 1983). Recently, we have seen movements based on themes such as normalization, mainstreaming, inclusion, the Regular Education Initiative, the Least Restrictive Environment, and so forth. Currently, the education community is concerned with inclusion, a movement with multiple definitions (Coutinho, Repp, & Denny, in press). There are broiling undercurrents within this movement. For example, (a) the National Education Association opposes inclusion, (b) some special educators question its rationality (e.g., Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994; Kauffman, 1992, 1993), while (c) other special educators contend either that special education has failed and these students should therefore be returned to the regular education classrooms, or that education in an integrated environment is a social right protected by the Constitution. The purpose of this section of the Journal of Behavioral Education is to present the topic of inclusion from multiple perspectives. The paper by Little and Witek (1996) is from a behavioral perspective, and it points out that the findings on the efficacy of inclusion are equivocal. They suggest that we look at inclusion from the perspectives of social validity and of functional outcome analysis. The latter focuses on teacher behaviors as the critical element for success. The paper by Moetler and Ishii-Jordan (1996) presents a different perspective through their model for teacher development and inclusion. They place an emphasis on what the student brings to the environment rather than on teacher behaviors that affect student behaviors. The differences, however, are more than semantic. Their approach

The Legislative and Litigation History of Special Education

Between the mid 1960s and 1975, state legislatures, the federal courts, and the U.S. Congress spelled out strong educational rights for children with disabilities. Forty-five state legislatures passed laws mandating, encouraging, and/or funding special education programs. Federal courts, interpreting the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ruled that schools could not discriminate on the basis of disability and that parents had due process rights related to their children's schooling. Congress, in legislation now retitled the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), laid out detailed procedural protections regarding eligibility for special educational services, parental rights, individualized education programs (IEPs), the requirement that children be served in the least restrictive environment, and the need to provide related (noneducational) services. Decisions on instructional matters such as curricula and the elements of the IEP remain the province of local and state authorities. Advocates for students with disabilities have continually sought separate (categorical) funding for special education services. Current movements toward block grants rather than categorical programs and toward greater inclusion of special education students in general education classrooms raise concerns in some quarters about whether students with disabilities will continue to have full access to the special services they need. While the cost of special services may be an unexpressed criterion in many decisions made by school districts, nowhere does the IDEA explicitly allow cost to be considered. Where a service is necessary for an individual child, cost considerations would not allow a school district to escape its obligations to the child. However, in instances where more than one appropriate configuration of services is available to meet a child's needs, the school district may be allowed to consider the cost of different alternatives.

The history of special education: from isolation to integration

The history of special education: from isolation to integration

The Development and History of Special Education in Tanzania

This article traces the historical development of special education in Tanzania and its future prospects. In addition, it will identify some factors that have helped shape the present state of special education in Tanzania, and present the major problems facing special education programs.

The History of Special Education: From Isolation to Integration

This comprehensive volume examines the facts, characters and events that shaped this field in Western Europe, Canada and the United States. From the first efforts to teach disabled people in early-Christian and medieval eras to such current mandates as Public Law 94-142, this study assesses the development of special education as a formal discipline. The book presents a four-part narrative that traces its emergence in detail, from 16th-century Spain through the Age of Enlightenment in 17th-century France and England to 18th-century issues in Europe and North America of placement, curriculum and early intervention. The status of teachers in the 19th century, and social trends and the movement toward integration in 20th-century programmes are considered as well.

Country Briefing Special Education in Sweden

ABSTRACT Three main periods may be discerned in the history of special education in Sweden: a) the stage of non‐differentiation; b) the stage of differentiation; c) the stage of integration. In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a major development of a range of special provision, in special schools, special classes and coordinated special education, within the framework of the comprehensive, compulsory school reform of 1962. Today the trend is towards non‐segregating measures within an individual and flexible programme in ‘a school for all’. Diagnosis is abolished as is the name ‘special education’, and the new curriculum has established a philosophy where handicap is seen as a relationship and the pupil welfare conference is responsible for designing remedial programme with a holistic view of the pupil. Two exceptions to the rule of integration in regular school classrooms are deaf pupils, who want to stay in segregated settings, and the mentally retarded, although there is a tendency towards increasing individual integration also within this latter group of pupils.

The History of Special Education: Social Control or Humanitarian Progress?

The author is principal of Eden Grove School, Appleby, Cumbria, for children with emotional and behavioural difficulties. He challenges some current interpretations of the aims and motives of those responsible for special education in Britain in the last hundred years or so.

Preservice Preparation of Regular Educators

A national survey to determine the topical content coverage of exceptional children and youth curriculum in institutes of higher education sought to determine what preparation is included for preservice regular education teachers. A total of 172 completed surveys (60% response rate) were returned from col leges and universities that prepare teachers in all 50 states. Of the 15 topical content areas listed, respondents ranked characteristics of exceptional children, mainstreaming issues and practices, facilitating positive attitudes toward exceptional children, and special education procedures as the four most heavily emphasized topic areas in their courses. The least heavily emphasized topic areas were assessment practices, history of special education, and data collection procedures. At least two thirds of the courses reflected a predominantly categorical focus. Finally, when comparing Pearson correlations of the topical areas between categorical and noncategorical approaches, differences in emphasis were noted in the areas of characteristics, definirions, causes of disabilitfes, and history of special education. Each of these four topic areas tendgd to be emphasized to a greater extent in the categorically oriented courses. Overall, the results indicate that prospective regular education teachers are not being adequatety prepared to fulfill the educational mandates of REI.

Historicising the Integration Debate

The history of special education is conceived within the integration debate in a way which lends credibility to two broad claims. The first is that governments have been lax in providing educational facilities for children with disabilities, while the second comprises an argument for shifting definitional control of the notion of ‘disability’ from the medical to the educational arena. The recent Report to the Australian Schools Commission on Integration in Australia exemplifies this stance by pointing to the initial reluctance of governments to assume responsibility for educating children with special needs, followed by their eventual involvement in establishing segregated educational facilities. With segregated schooling becoming the norm, the problem now confronting educators is how to integrate these students and their supporting resources into the regular school system.

Striving for Excellence in Special Education Policy in New Zealand and Australia

Throughout the world, special education has always been substantially concerned with “striving for excellence”, in the sense that what has been sought and striven for by special educators are specific programs and policies which effectively meet the special educational needs of particular children and adults who are not adequately served by the programs and policies generally available. The term “striving” has two related meanings and both seem apt in the present context. First, an examination of the history of special education reveals that appropriate special education policies and programs are seldom, if ever, achieved unless those seeking them on behalf of exceptional learners have the commitment, determination, and fortitude to strive - in the sense of “fight” - often against very considerable opposition, to achieve what is required. The second meaning of “strive” - to make a great and tenacious effort, also epitomizes the work of those who have sought and still seek appropriate special educational programs and policies.

REVIEWS

Books: Outside the Mainstream: A History of Special Education J.S. Hurt Books: School Reports in the Juvenile Court: A Second Look Report of a NACRO Working Party NACRO Books: Making The Special School Ordinary? Derek Baker and Keith Bovair (eds) Books: The Strugglers: Working with Children Who Fail to Learn to Read Tony Martin Books: Meeting Individual Needs Mel Ainscow and Jim Muncey Books: Child Language Disability Kay Mogford and Jane Sadler (eds) Books: Sexuality and Mental Handicap: An Educators Resource Book Hilary Dixon. Classroom Books and Materials: I Have Asthma I Am Blind Brenda Pettenuzzo Classroom Books and Materials: Mastering Maths Skills C. Barcham, R. Bushell and C. McDonnell Classroom Books and Materials: Spots, Feathers and Curly Tails Nancy Tafuri Classroom Books and Materials: So Much to Tell You John Marsden Software: Concept Keyboard Pudd ESM 1988 Software: Helping with Spelling Dorset County Psychological Service Software: Movaword Chalksoft Ltd. Software: Supastore Plus ‐ The Database for Education, Home and Business

Stability of Categorical Designations for Special Education Students

The categorical stability of 523 students with mild handicaps during their school years was investigated in a retrospective study of special education records in three high schools. The students had final classifications as learning disabled (LD), educable mentally retarded (EMR), emotionally disturbed (ED), and speech impaired (SP). Twenty-four percent had at least two different classifications during their school years. In analyzing stability of classification according to the initial category designation, the least stable category was SP, and the most stable was ED. Of the students who changed classification sometime during their special education history, most had changed to one different category, but some had changed to two different categories. Most of the changes took place during the secondary years. The ED and EMR categories tended to receive proportionately more members from other categories than did the LD and SP categories. The SP category tended to receive few members from other categories of handicapping conditions, while the LD category received an intermediate number relative to its large size. The strongest predictor of reclassification was initial classification in the SP category.

Outside the Mainstream: A History of Special Education.

Institutional life for the children of the poor - workhouse schools before 1870 the workhouse and beyond vagrant and delinquent children the education of blind and deaf children before 1893 the feeble-minded child before 1890 the defective child, 1888-1918 inter-war years from Butler to Warnock.

Evidence of the Regular Education initiative In Federally Funded Personnel Preparation Programs

Cooperation with regular education to serve mildly handicapped special education students is a theme that has been recurrent throughout the history of special education and reiterated in the form of the Regular Education Initiative. Yet little documentation of the actual impact of this initiative on teacher preparation practices has been reported. This article presents the results of an analysis of 40 of the top-ranked federally funded special education personnel preparation proposals for programs to prepare teachers of students with mild-moderate disabilities. The article describes (1) the degree to which grant proposers explicitly articulated a philosophy of cooperation between regular and special education, (2) how this philosophical commitment was translated into specific program design components, and (3) changes in the extent of cooperation over recent years. Areas of strong support, inconsistencies, and issues of concern in pursuing the regular education initiative through teacher preparation programs are discussed.

No more noses to the glass.

No More Noses to the Glass Special education should be carried on as an integral part of the total educational enterprise, not separately. Of all the policies of The Council for Exceptional Children, none has more operational consequences, or better expresses what CEC is about, than that. Under suitable conditions, our policies say, education in the regular class is optimal for most exceptional children; education outside the regular class ought to be the exception, not the rule. But when I talk to people unfamiliar with special education, it is the regular education/special education relationship that raises the most questions. You have probably heard questions like these yourself: Why do you insist on educating exceptional children in the regular education environment? Given the problems of 'these children,' doesn't it make sense to provide for them in their own realm? Just as good, mind you, and maybe better, but their own, where their needs can be met and the education of other children not interfered with. Leaving aside the fact that this is precisely the kind of thinking that undergirded the separate but equal doctrine repudiated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, there are other, more compelling reasons for the CEC policy stated above. In the first place, the policy is born of both experience and conviction. We in CEC have learned, and therefore believe, that exceptional children cannot succeed as well if they are required to learn with their noses pressed to the glass, from the outside looking in. The history of special education reveals that nose-to-the-glass education doesn't do the job. Indiscriminantly educating exceptional children apart has proven to be bad educational practice, bad social policy, and, in the end, bad fiscal stewardship. In plain language, when special education becomes a tag-along or an alongside of, or a second system, everyone loses. But if you bring the children to the other side of the glass, you create--on a purely practical level--possibilities that are much more exciting, not just for those children, but for all of education itself. The history of special education confounds the separatism of the skeptic. The fact is that while special education aims the exceptional child, it enhances the educational program for all children: * The fundamental individualism of every child dictates that educational services to all children be planned and delivered on the basis of an individually designed program. * A continuum of educational settings ranging from the regular classroom to more intensive instructional options is in place to serve the needs of every child. * Specialized resources become available to the entire student population that they would not otherwise have, including those for abused and neglected children, substance abusers, presuicidal children, and other at risk students. …

Transition in the 1990s: A Reply to Knowlton and Clark

Transition in the 1990s: A Reply to Knowlton and Clark The April issue of Exceptional Children (1987, Vol. 53, No. 6) addressed transition from school to adult life, which marks an important point in the history of special education. The issues raised by contributing authors signaled the shift in professional focus from accessibility concerns to the examination of outcomes associated with special education services. In little more than a decade, special educators have become advocates not only for the right of students with handicaps to educational services, but also for their right to lead productive and dignified lives as a result of attending our nation's public schools. The special issue of Exceptional Children concluded with a discussion of the future of transition efforts. Knowlton and Clark (1987) raised several important issues that practitioners will undoubtedly confront in the next decade and beyond. These issues include how the increase in national attention on academic excellence will affect programs serving secondary students with handicaps and the importance of preparing secondary special educators to deal effectively with the transition of these students. Knowlton and Clark pointed out that implementation of effective transition programs will require changing much more than recognition of the problem. We agree with Knowlton and Clark that system-wide change will be required, but we are concerned about two of their recommendations concerning the future of transition efforts. Specifically, we believe that ignoring an excellent body of literature because subjects were labeled is unwarranted. Moreover, refocusing the goals of transition programs to include independent living and social outcomes clashes with what we believe are important trends in special education. LABELING IN THE LITERATURE Knowlton and Clark suggested that severely handicapped persons have been overrepresented in the transition literature--and that the focus on these persons may alienate many potential consumers of transition services. Knowlton and Clark suggested that professionals may find that the existing literature is not relevant to their efforts to serve persons with or moderate handicaps. Nevertheless, pointing out the irony in this situation, the authors indicated that many of the severely handicapped subjects referred to in the literature could very well drift into a more moderately handicapped category with more careful assessment of their disability. We agree with Knowlton and Clark that the possible exclusion of some professionals and the clients they serve from the progress made in the field of transition would be unfortunate and unproductive. We do not believe, however, that changing the subject descriptors used by researchers will necessarily make the transition literature more palatable. Increasingly, special education is examining the outcomes of its efforts, including the provision of secondary special education and transitional services. We believe that the focus on outcomes should remain the basis for evaluating the relevance of special education and transitional services. Consumers must address the effectiveness of the procedures reported in research studies and examine the utility of the recommendations made by investigators. The results of transitional services research based on sound experimental designs are likely to be replicated at all levels. All professionals should be encouraged to judge research results on their technical merit rather than on the labels chosen by the investigators to describe their subjects. In this way, the large body of excellent work already existing on transition can be used for the benefit of all. It is our contention that, since its inception, transition has been a program targeted to all persons with handicaps who need services (Will, 1984). Knowlton and Clark's lament about the focus on persons with severe as opposed to mild handicaps seems out of place. …