Special Education Students' Placement and Performance Outcomes on Math Assessments

It is abundantly clear, after reading this article, that minorities students are overrepresented in special education classrooms. One point that really stuck out for me from this article was how students are placed in special programs and provided with special services because of their results on early elementary testing. “Diverse learners are more likely to be referred for additional testing and placement in special education programs because achievement tests typically do not assess literacy skills that they may have acquired outside school, and these skills often differ from the ones these children are expected to have when they enter school” (pg. 2). As educators

Placement decisions related to students with disabilities is an issue that arises from providing a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) and the least restrictive environment (LRE). While FAPE and LRE are not new requirements, the Individuals with Disabilities Educational Act (IDEA) continues to be open to interpretation and implementation of the mandates (McGovern, 2015). A student’s least restrictive environment is the setting where the student can be integrated with his non-disabled peers. IDEA requires that students with disabilities be educated in the most integrated, least restrictive environment (Carson, 2015); however, this is where the grey area enters. The interpretation of what the least restrictive environment is, depends

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has established procedures for the placement of students with disabilities within a school setting. Members of the child study

In some general classrooms, teachers tend to give more time and attention to children with disabilities, leaving general education students who may be struggling with little to no help. Socialization is another whole ballpark, inclusion could lead to children developing negative attitudes about peers with disabilities, especially if they feel they are receiving more attention from the teacher and other students in the classroom. Teachers of general education classes may have a fear of teaching students with disabilities. They feel they do not know them well enough and that they will make a mistake. This can then in return allow the teacher to push the student with a disability away and not give them the best education piece they can. These teachers feel like they should not have to change their classroom for a student that is coming to them. It also shows that these teachers are not trained properly in special education.

The data provided shows that an overrepresentation of minority students exists in special education. One of the main reasons for this overrepresentation has to do with the variation of studies on this topic. Differences have been noted in

The problem of disproportionate numbers of minority students in special education can be attributed to a report by Lloyd Dunn in 1968 (as cited in Skiba et al., 2008) even though discrimination was evident long before that in America. The phenomenon of disproportionality as it relates to students from minority backgrounds being placed in special education refers to the percentage of students receiving services being a higher rate than is expected or that differs significantly from other races. Skiba et al. (2008) discuss the history of various aspects of the civil rights movement as they pertain to the issue of disproportionality of students from minority backgrounds in special education, the measurement tools used to determine the need for special education, the current status of disproportionality, and what factors have contributed to the discrepancies in numbers. Finally, recommendations are offered by the authors on how the existence of disproportionality of students from a minority background can be rectified.

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.

People with disabilities have long suffered from discrimination and segregation. In the 1880, people with hearing, visual, physical, mental or emotional impairments were sent to be educated in residential institutions or asylums. ("Issues about Change) Parents and family of those with disabilities put pressure on our government and legislation to develop and provide equal access to education by way of mainstreaming or special education. Section 504 of Public Law 93-112 passed in 1973 had far reaching effect on exclusion and discrimination. (Gollnick and Chinn p. 168) This law did for those with disabilities that Title IX did for females and education; it provided access and participation in regular education and extracurricular

Students with special needs need deserve the same education general education students are presented with. The philosophy of “ Disability Inclusion” concentrates on creating a safe, loving, and effective learning environment for students who suffer from physical, learning, and behavioral disabilities. When a student with disabilities is placed in the same environment as a non-disabled student, the results show wonderful improvement. When we are able to discover the strength of the student we are able to see just how much the student can improve in an inclusion classroom. Disability Inclusion not only sets a new beginning for an equal education of special education students, but it allows for more interaction with the child, and a more hands-on assessment.

One of the leading causes of disproportionate identification in special education is the school and teachers themselves. Minority students are more likely to attend urban, inner city schools where many of the teachers are not as experienced when dealing with racially and ethnically diverse classrooms (Donovan & Cross, 2002). Thus, these low-income schools are not going to offer advanced classes or top-notch special education

Within the past decades and a big discussion has occurred regarding the most appropriate setting within which to provide education for students in special education. Although the change in the educational environment is significant for handicapped student the concepts of inclusion also bring up new issues for the regular education classroom teachers.

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