Jeanmarie Badar

Instruction, Not Inclusion, Should Be the Central Issue in Special Education: An Alternative View from the USA

Abstract A focus on anything other than instruction undercuts the legal and moral rights of students with disabilities to an appropriate education and fails to produce substantive social justice. D...

Better Thinking and Clearer Communication Will Help Special Education

The authors argue that insufficient attention has been given to foundational concepts in special education. Two classes of foundational concepts are discussed: human constructions and logico-mathematical facts. Four human constructions are examined: (1) making teaching most important, (2) discriminating among ideas, (3) choosing conceptual models, and (4) responding to diversity. Three logico-mathematical realities are detailed: (1) statistical phenomena, (2) sorting, and (3) labeling. The authors conclude with comments on the importance of better thinking and clearer communication, suggesting that the consequences of poor thinking and communicating are negative for both special educators and their students. Five recommendations for action are proposed.

Inclusive Education Moving Forward

Abstract Change is not synonymous with improvement. Improvement of special education requires better instruction of individuals with disabilities. Although LRE and inclusion are important issues, they are not the primary legal or practical issues in improving special education. Federal law (IDEA) requires a continuum of alternative placements, not placement in general education in all cases. To make actual progress in education of students with disabilities, a single and strict principle of equality or/and antidiscriminatory legal instruments, such as the CRPD, is not enough. Social justice as a multifaceted principle can serve the education of the whole spectrum of special educational needs in national and international contexts. Responsible inclusion demands attention to the individual instructional needs of individuals with disabilities and consideration of the practical realities involved in teaching. If inclusive education is to move forward, it must involve placing students with disabilities in general education only if that is the environment in which they seem most likely to learn the skills that will be most important for their futures.

It's Instruction over Place--Not the Other Way Around!.

Full inclusion of students with disabilities focuses on where students are taught, not on instruction. The idea that all students, including those with disabilities, can and should be taught together in the same class and school is a highly prized myth. Focusing on inclusion rather than on appropriate instruction and on a continuum of alternative placements is illogical as well as illegal. It’s also stressful for teachers, most of whom are unable to teach such a learning-diverse group of students in a single classroom and do it well. Responsible inclusion requires recognizing individual differences and being more concerned about appropriate, effective instruction than about where a student is taught.

Extremism and Disability Chic

ABSTRACT The word chic refers to something fashionable or stylish. Chic varies for individuals and groups and with time and place. Something chic may have desirable or undesirable long-term consequences. Disability and extremism are also changeable concepts, depending on comparison to social norms. People with disabilities should have the option of being chic. However, disability itself should not become chic, nor should ineffective or harmful treatments of disabilities or extreme models of service delivery, even if some consider them chic. Disability chic refers to a form of extremism that includes undesirable, distorted positive perceptions and denial of disability, as well as inappropriate responses to it. People are gifts whether they have disabilities or not, but disabilities are not gifts.

Special Education Today in the United States of America

Abstract Special education in the USA is, in most respects, a 20th century phenomenon and is now governed primarily by federal legislation first enacted in 1975. The federal law in its most recent reauthorization (2004) continues to require a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for all students with disabilities, a full continuum of alternative placements (CAP) ranging from residential or hospital care to inclusion in general education, an individual education plan or program (IEP) for each student identified as needing special education, and placement in the least restrictive environment (LRE) that is thought best for implementing the IEP. Parents must be involved in the special education process. Approximately 14 percent of public school students were identified for special education in 2004–2005, but the number and percentage of students identified in most high-incidence categories as needing special education have declined in recent years (the total for all categories was about 8.5 percent of public school students in 2010). A variety of evidence-based interventions can be used to address the wide range of instructional and behavioral needs of students with disabilities and their families, including transition to further education or work, family services, and teacher education. Special education in the USA may find new sources of support and thrive or may become less common or be abandoned entirely due to criticism and withdrawal of support for social welfare programs of government.

Inclusion of All Students in General Education? International Appeal for A More Temperate Approach to Inclusion

Abstract Including students with disabilities in general education when appropriate is an important goal of special education. However, inclusion is not as important as effective instruction, which...

Where special education goes to die

ABSTRACT We suggest that special education could die among common myths about it. That is, special education could cease to exist, at least as we know it, because its true nature and requirements for its functioning are misunderstood. We discuss only 12 common myths about special education, recognizing that there are many more myths and that the ones we write about could be stated differently. We conclude with comments about how the long roots of the idea that special education could become unnecessary might be traced to a publication by Evelyn Deno in 1970 and express our hope that special education will continue as a separate entity.