Pros And Cons Of Legislative Mandates

Inclusion is a program that has been in effect for many years, yet has not become standard procedure in all public schools. The program ?inclusion as the name implies, means all students with disabilities, regardless of the nature or severity of the disability and need for special services, receive their total education within the regular education classroom? (Haller 167). Inclusion is an involved program that has taken time to establish in the most beneficial manner, however the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has helped in the formation of the program (Haller 54). ?The Education of all Handicapped children Act mandated that all school-age children with disabilities receive a free appropriate education in the least restrictive environment? (Haller 54). This means that the education program would cease to pull children out of the classroom for resource instruction. The idea of the

Inclusion is beneficial for all students in a general education classroom, not just the students with disabilities. Inclusion teaches all students understanding, compassion, respect, and acceptance of others. Students with disabilities are able to learn from peers and teachers alike. Inclusion also boosts a student’s confidence because they feel accepted within the classroom, the school, and the community. Inclusion leads to more success in achieving the goals set forth in the IEP. The Common Core State Standards go hand in hand with inclusion because they address the knowledge and skills

According to the latest figures available from Data Accountability Center, U.S. Department of Education, 2,415,564 students were identified as having a Specific Learning Disability in the Fall of 2010 (“Full Inclusion”). With the severity of the number of individuals with disabilities in the school system, the controversy of the best way to support them arises. One of the solutions of this controversy is the issue of full inclusion. Those opposed to the idea of full inclusion fear that the approach may impede on the children without disabilities and put a strain on the students with disabilities. The major stakeholders against full inclusion also fear that the process will negatively affect the teachers, as well as, the atmosphere of the classrooms. Many of these parties and individuals are not fully against inclusion all together, but do not support the idea of full inclusion.

Prior to 1975, no federal requirements existed for students with disabilities to attend school, or requirements for schools to attempt to teach students with disabilities (Salvia, Yesseldyke, & Bolt, 2013, p. 25). However, upon the enactment of several federal laws, such as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB), student with disabilities received access to free, appropriate public education which in turned required students with disabilities to participate in statewide assessments. According to Public Law 94-142 (now included in IDEA), it requires an individual education program (IEP) for students with disabilities. As part of the IEP, it contains items such as present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, measurable annual goals, criteria of progress, special education and related services as well as documenting any necessary accommodations needed for statewide assessments. The author provides a comparison of statewide assessments including items such as participation, accommodations and types of assessments between the states of Texas and Massachusetts.

High Stakes Testing has been overly integrated in the education systems. High-stakes testing are used to determine grade retention, school curriculum, and whether or not students will receive a high school diploma (Myers, 2015). Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, high stakes testing has become the norm and mandating that students must pass a standardized test before moving up in grade. As a special education director, the focus is to ensure the student’s accommodations are being followed. Accommodations help increase students’ academic performance. “Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) call for students with disabilities to participate in the general education curriculum and in testing programs to the maximum extent possible for each student (Luke and Schwartz, 2010).” Throughout the years, high stakes testing is becoming more common than ever before. The reality is high stakes testing is one indicator in evaluating children with specific needs. This paper will discuss, the violation of the statutory language regarding assessment based on IDEA, the strategies and goals of a remediation, staff training, common Core and PARCC assessment, and funding for the remediation plan under IDEA.

Inclusion, in the world of education, is an approach or teaching strategy that focuses on including students with disabilities in the general education setting. The goal of inclusion is to educate students who may struggle with a variety of disabilities. The views on inclusion differ. Some educators are very receptive to the ideals of inclusion and all that it in tells. “The teachers (a) had favorable views of the concept of inclusion; (b) differed in their efficacy in achieving successful inclusion, and (c) faced challenges in their inclusive practices” (Hodge, Ammah, Casebolt, LaMaster, Hersman, Samalot-Rivera, & Sato 2009, 402). Some educators believe that it takes away from student learning for the non-disabled student. Jana Kratochvílová states: teacher have to address the fundamental question: how to most effectively organize the learning process for a diverse community of pupils within the class and therefore he needs to think through the possibilities of internal differentiation in the organizational aspect” (Kratochvílová 2015, 640). It is true, not all students with disabilities can be included in a general education classroom successfully. The student’s placement may require reevaluation in order to help provide the student with the best opportunity to succeed. Reevaluating the staff and their level of understanding and education concerning inclusion may increase the changes for a student to be successful. The staff should not

This report compromises evidence surrounding the use of standardized testing for students with disabilities. Testing protocols for minority students necessitates a great deal of reform. Yielding a corroborated framework, two powerful research professionals join forces; producing pragmatic analysis and improvement ideals in regards to assessing students with disabilities, a vastly marginalized minority in regards to standardize testing. Karen Barton, lead Principal Research Scientist for Power of U, McGraw-Hill, obtained her Ph.D. in Educational Research and Measurement from the University of South Carolina preceding Barton achieved her M.S. in Special Education at Longwood College. Offering unique and extensive research abilities, she consults often regarding education-based research. Barton’s co-collaborator, Daniel Koretz is an expert on educational assessment and the impact of high-stakes testing. His research has includes the assessment of students with disabilities. Koretz obtained a doctorate is in developmental psychology from Cornell University. Koretz maintains fifteen national affiliations with educational associations and forty, globally referenced publications. Prudent to my research, by utilizing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and policies pertaining to students’ Individualized Education Program (IEP) these two authors and their publication assists in supplementing validity to this essay as these sources along with additional methodically integrated

Chapter one discusses the concept of “all means all” and the creation, revision, and amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This act addresses the responsibilities of educators as they ensure that all students are receiving access and support to the same curriculum as their peers. Idea requires that all eligible students have an IEP and that they are educated in the least restrictive environment as possible.

I believe that the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) is one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted by the federal government. IDEA has six principal components. First, under IDEA, students with disabilities cannot be excluded from receiving a public education. Additionally, schools must provide students with fair and unbiased assessments in all areas of suspected disability. This evaluation should use nondiscriminatory assessments to gather and measure data. IDEA mandates that schools must provide students with a free and individualized educational program (IEP) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). To the greatest extend possible; students with disabilities must be educated with their nondisabled peers. Furthermore,

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was passed in 2001.This law mandates that all students are required to have access to the general education curriculum and participate in accountability testing. Specifically “all students with disabilities should have access to, participate in, and make progress in, the general curriculum,” (Ayres, K. M., Lowrey, K. A., Douglas, K. H., & Sievers, C., 2011). The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) of 2004 ensures students with disabilities have access to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), meaningful, and in the least restrictive environment. There is a huge disconnect between implementing both laws because NCLB holds stakeholder’s accountable for teaching students with severe disabilities from the general curricula but on the other hand IDEA mandates students learn from an individualized curricula that support their post- secondary needs.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal education law that ensures students with needs receive a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. The students of needs are identified by the specific school’s team of educational professionals, who develop an IEP (Individual Educational Plan) that is specially designed to meet the needs of the student, as well as being a tool to assess student progress. With the extent of disabilities, the IDEA does not demand equal results, but requires that students with disabilities merely benefit from their education (Essex, 2016). IDEA focuses on the identified specific needs of the students; and its services are utilized to address these needs.

The idea of children with disabilities, whether they be mild or severe has been a very controversial and misunderstood topic. In the past inclusion has brought about huge changes for not only the students, but also the parents and families of these children, and staff at schools. Teachers and education professionals were the first to really feel the wrath and intimidation of this dramatic shift in education. There were several different factors that were coming about that made it very difficult for schools and teachers, the unorganized mandates were strict and didn’t allow much time for change. “President Gerald Ford signed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) into law in 1975. Since the original passage of the EAHCA, the law has been amended four times and renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)” (Conroy, Yell, Katsiyannis, & Collins, 2010, para.1).

Inclusion began when The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), was passed in 1974. IDEA marked a turning point for the placement of children with special needs. This legislation stated that all school systems are required to receive federal funding to provide a free and appropriate education for all students regardless of how handicapped they are. The term inclusion does not actually appear in the text of IDEA. Instead, the law requires that children with special needs be educated to the maximum extent appropriate in the least restrictive environment. The IDEA says that the least restrictive environment is the regular education classroom. (Special Education, 2001) The IDEA requires the Individual Education Program (IEP) team to consider placement in the regular classroom in the beginning to determine if it is an appropriate placement for the child. The law specified different environments where special services could take place. The main goal was to place special education students in regular education classrooms for gains in academics and behavior for the children. (Singleton, n.d)

This controversy may stem from the fact that inclusion is expensive and experts disagree about how much time disabled students should spend in regular classrooms (Cambanis, 2001). Although this topic is controversial, it cannot be ignored. Inclusion will, at some point, affect 1% of all children born each year, who will have disabilities and the families and educators they will come in contact with (Stainback, 1985).

According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, students with disabilities should be placed in a “least restrictive environment.” One of the main ideas of this act was to improve the learning experiences of students with disabilities by giving them learning opportunities outside of a special education classroom. The number of students with disabilities being placed in their general education classrooms is increasing more and more each year. The U.S Department of Education’s 27th annual report to Congress on the implementation of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2005) indicates that the number of students with disabilities in general education classrooms has risen to almost 50 percent. This is about a 17 percent increase from the 1997 U.S