IDEA's procedural protections weredesigned to enable parents to be effectiveadvocates for their children. Not only doparents have a unique concern for theirchild, but in most instances, they are theprimary repository of information aboutthe child's medical condition, academic his-tory, behavioral patterns, and responses toprevious intervention

chools experiment with inclusion, theIDEA's guarantees of appropriate educationbased on the individual needs of studentswith disabilities should be maintained.Additionally, the IDEA's procedural protec-tions and parent resource centers are neces-sary to protect the rights and interests of stu-dents with disabilities.

effective with special education stu-dents include intensive instruction; individu-alized instruction; close, frequent monitor-ing and feedback; multiple methods ofbehavior control; lengthy, often multiyearteacher training; curriculum modification;consultation and supportive services; andteacher willingness to work with studentswho have special nee

appears that inadequate preparationof teachers by colleges of education andincreasing expectations for classroomteachers are major causes of overreferral ofstudents with special needs." Few under-graduate teaching programs routinely pro-vide students with specific skills designed tomeet the needs of students with learningdisabilities, and few state certification pro-grams require regular education teachersto have those skills.57 It is not sufficient forcertification programs to require a singlesurvey course on children with disabilities.Indeed, the National Association of StateBoards of Education has called such cours-es "inherently superficial."9 Schools of edu-cation should provide prospective teachersnot only with information about various dis-abilities, but also with detailed strategies forworking with students and opportunities topractice these strategies in realistic class-room situations

The expectations for inclusion are greatadvocates hope it will be at least as effectiveas special education, allow schools to allo-cate more resources to regular classes, pro-mote local flexibility, and be less stigmatizingto students with special need

ucation, but a larger proportion ofstudents can be served in regular educationif increased resources are provided, substan-tial changes are made in typical instruction-al practices, and local school districts arecommitted to greater inclusion.Of students found to be eligible for spe-cial services under the IDEA, only a smallpercentage (about 5%) are now served inlocations entirely separated from the regularschool building, such as hospitals, dayschools, residential programs, or homestudy. Of t

deally, program decisions should bebased upon each student's needs, and fund-ing mechanisms should respond to and sup-port those programmatic decisions. At thesame time, real limitations on school bud-gets make it essential to control total costs.To some extent, this fact makes it inevitablethat the needs of individual children will beweighed against one another and against thefiscal needs of the rest of the schoo

ate. State funding struc-tures may base special education funding onthe number of students identified for specialeducation; the category of disability (forexample, a school district may receive morefunding for a student with hearing loss thanfor a student with learning disabilities); apercentage of the costs of expenditures incertain categories (for example, the statemay pay a share of the salary for each specialeducation teach

ely to affect program decisions. Fundingbased on the number of students identifiedfor special education encourages states toidentify children for special educationrather than provide the same services to thestudent without first finding a disability.States may pay a larger share of the salary ofa special educator who works in a separatesetting than for one who works with the reg-ular teacher in the regular classroom orwho works with all students, regardless ofIDEA eligibility. Such mechanisms canencourage local districts to focus special ser-vices outside the regular classroom and torely on expensive evaluations for eligibilitydetermination.Most states have some mechanism to pro-vide additional support for children withsevere disabilities requiring extensive ser-vices. In a number of states, districts receivemore assistance from the state when theyassign students with intensive special needsto private special needs schools than theywould if they were to establish a comparableprogram within the district.48Removing existing incentives can createnew, but not necessarily better, incentives. Astudent with autism may benefit from spe-cialized programs available under contractfrom a qualified private school. However, ifthe state eliminates funding mechanisms topay a large share of the cost of such place-ments, the student's school district may bemotivated to serve the student locally andprovide fewer services-a less desirable out-come for the student.Budgeting ChallengesThe fiscal implications of special education,especially for students with "mild" disabilitiessuch as LD, are profound. The populationof students with mild disabilities is large andimpossible to clearly differentiate from thepopulation as a whole. Yet, minimal inter-ventions for students with mild disabilitieshave a dismal history, as discussed by bothHocutt and Lyon in this issue. Intensiveinterventions in some cases appear morepromising, but they are expensive.This content downloaded from207.251.83.10 on Thu, 05 Dec 2024 13:34:10 UTCAll use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

emically or socially in whichsetting are highly fallible. No interventionsin either regular or special education areuniformly successful for students with spe-cial needs; students with the same disabili-ty, in roughly the same degree of severity,may vary tremendously in personality,motivation, social and family support sys-tems, and compensating strengths. Astrength of the IDEA is its requirementthat placements and services be deter-mined individually and that parents beoffered the opportunity to contribute theirknowledge and insight about their child asthe student's individualized educationprogram (IEP) is developed. For thesereasons, some advocacy organizations andthe major national teachers' unio

Fifty-one percent of students servedunder the IDEA in grades K-12 in 1992-93had learning disabilities as their primary dis-ability. Another 22% had speech or languageimpairments; 11% had mental retardation;9% had serious emotional disturbance; and7% had hearing or visual impairments,orthopedic impairments, autism, tr

s Hocutt notes in thisjournal issue, research consistently finds thatgeneral education teachers will not toleratedisruptive, aggressive, defiant, or dangerousbehaviors. Elementary and secondary teach-ers are concerned that students follow class-room rules, listen to and comply withteacher directives--in short, behave in anorderly fashion. By definition, students withserious emotional disturbance have signifi-cant difficulty in these areas. They are morelikely than students with any other disabilityto first experience disability-related prob-lems in adolescence, although their parentsreport that the majority of these studentsbegan to display their emotional problemsin their grade school years.'"

nt.7 The majorcauses of language impairments are mentalretardation, hearing impairment, centralnervous system dysfunctions (generally inthe form of learning disabilities), and envi-ronmental factors such as lack of stimula-tion.8 Determining causes with precision inindividual cases is often not possible.Indeed, classifications based on causationhave not proven useful for remediation, andso professionals are generally advised to baseinterventions on an assessment of the indi-vidual student's language abilities.28Treatment by a language therapist gen-erally leads to improvement in functionalcommunication skills,29 although the treat-ment cannot usually be expected to eradi-cate the problem.Mental Retardation (MR)Eleven percent of IDEA-eligible studentshave mental retardation (MR).s The sever-ity of mental retardation is classified as mild(generally defined by an IQ test score ofbetween 50-55 and 70, accompanied bydeficits in adaptive behavior), moderate(IQ of 35-40 to 50-55), severe (IQ of20-25 to 35-40), or profound (IQ below20-25).31 Roughly 75% to 85% of thosewith mental retardation fall in the categoryof mild mental retardation (MMR).31,32 Inthis journal issue, the other three cate-gories are referred to collectively as severemental retardation.From an epidemiological viewpoint,using a cutoff of 50 IQ points to divide stu-dents into different classifications is arbi-trary, because students may show either mildor severe mental retardation as a result ofthe same diagnosis, such as Down's syn-drome. As a group, however, students withsevere mental retardation are more likely toalso show signs of serious conditions withneurological complications, such as Down'ssyndrome, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, hearingimpairment, visual impairment, and otherstructural, chromosomal, or metabolic birthdefects affecting the central nervous system.In a study of 458 students with mental retar-dation in Atlanta," two-thirds of the studentswith severe MR, but less than 20% of the stu-dents with MMR, were known to have anoth-er neurological condition. Moreover, thestudents with severe mental retardation weremore likely to have multiple neurologicalconditions.Nationally, African-American studentsare more than twice as likely as whites tobe diagnosed as having MMR. (See thearticle by Reschly in this journal issue.)Researchers have some understanding,though far from complete, of the reasonsfor this disproportionate representation.Causes most commonly proposed arepovertyl6 and cultural bias." Recent impor-tant research concludes that poverty is amajor cause of disproportionate African-American representation within the MMRcategory, but that poverty does not explainthe differences at the mildest levels of me

8 THE FUTURE OF CHILDREN - SPRING 1996Despite their prevalence, learning disabil-ities are poorly defined or understood.Learning disabilities are identified by profes-sionals in many fields, including pediatrics,psychology, neurology, and audiology.Although a coalition of professional and par-ent organizations has agreed upon a broadand complex definition of LD,21 there are nouniversally accepted, validated tests or diag-nostic criteria to determine the presence orabsence of learning disabilities. Someobservers argue that the IDEA's requirementof multidisciplinary evaluations increases thelikelihood of an LD diagnosis because a stu-dent may meet the criteria established by oneprofessional discipline but not another.=Learning disabilities are most commonlydiagnosed on the basis of a notable discrep-ancy between the student's academicachievement and ability to learn. In otherwords, the student has reasonable intelli-gence and adequate opportunity to learnbut performs poorly for unknown reasons.Ability to learn is usually measured by intelli-gence quotient (IQ), and the discrepancybetween ability and achievement must besubstantial. Specific standards are set by indi-vidual states, but the American PsychiatricAssociation suggests a discrepancy of eithertwo standard deviations or one standarddeviation plus other factors such as motor,sensory, or language differences, which arebelieved to have artificially depressed thestudent's IQ

Ethnicity and DisabilityIt has long been noted that AfricanAmericans are disproportionately represent-ed in special education. At the same time,Hispanics are nominally underrepresentedin most categories of special education. (Seethe article by Reschly in this journal issue.)While it is common for special educators tobe accused of overidentification of minoritychildren, attributing some identifications tocultural bias, Wagner found higher inci-dence among minorities of deafness, blind-ness, and other disabilities measured byaccepted, objective criteria. In her statisticalanalysis of a large sample, poverty played amajor role in this overrepresentation.17 Themajority of the disproportionate representa-tion of African-American students in specialeducation is within the category of mildmental retardation. Disproportionate repre-sentation is discussed by Reschly in connec-tion with mental retardation.Eligibility and EntitlementProcessesStudents who may have a disability are iden-tified and referred for evaluation by theirclassroom teachers or, more rarely, by theirparents or pediatricians.s8 Once referred,students are entitled to a multidisciplinaryevaluation provided by specialists compe-tent in each area of suspected disability.9 Ifa student is found to have a disability and toneed special services, then he or she is enti-tled to services under the IDEA. Once eligi-bility is determined, the school develops anindividualized education program (IEP) lay-ing out goals for the student, proposedplacement, and services to be provided bythe school district. Parental consent isrequired before a student can be evaluated,services provided, or the student's place-ment chang

Although identifying a student as "dis-abled" entitles him or her to special educa-tion services, a potentially large expense,school districts nationally have identified alarger proportion of their student body eachyear as having a disability. Many factors con-tribute to this increase.First, funding incentives in most statesencourage school districts to label studentsas disabled. Services delivered to studentswith a "disability" label are likely to be eitherpartly or fully reimbursed by the state,whereas the same services given to studentswithout a recognized disability are

have real, persistent, and substantial individ-ual differences and educational needs thatregular education has been unable toaccommodate. These individual differencesvary widely, from medical conditions such ascerebral palsy, to dyslexia, to pervasive andchronic maladaptive patterns of behavior

The IDEA governs the educational rights of individuals from birth to age21, though only students in elementary and secondary school are addressedin this journal issu

s. Only since a federal court case in 19722 and the passage offederal legislation in 19753 have all states been mandated to provide a free,appropriate public education to all students with disabilities.Today, as Parrish and Chambers point out in this journal issue, specialeducation for students with disabilities is the largest categorical program inpublic schools, costing an estimated $32 billi