History/Legislation

Prior to 1990, there was no comprehensive legislation regarding the education of physically handicapped or learning disabled children. In tracing the history of this legislation, one finds only minor mentions of handicapped people; this is apparent in following citations of handicapped rights. The first Section 504 of Congress' Rehabilitation Act (1973) states that no handicapped individual may be discriminated against or excluded from any federally funded program or activity. In 1974 an amendment was added to the Act to clarify its relation to school systems. This act became a "national commitment" to regulation in 1977.

The American with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is the first comprehensive piece of legislation regarding the civil rights of the handicapped. ADA is the overriding law which established civil rights for disabled people as well as a clear and comprehensive prohibition of discrimination on the basis of disability. ADA sets out to significantly affect the environments in which handicapped people live and work and to ultimately correct many of the negative stereotypes of handicapped people. These goals are to be reached by reducing labor market discrimination, removing barriers to communication and transportation, and improving access to public places. More specifically, "ADA requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for 'otherwise qualified workers' with disabilities unless the accommodations impose an 'undue hardship' on the employer" (Johnson and Baldwin, 1993, p.775). ADA was passed in response to the increasing political force of the handicapped, who used the civil rights movement of the 1960s as their model (Johnson and Baldwin, 1993, p.775).

P.L. 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act [now known as the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)] was enacted by Congress on November 29, 1975, making equal educational opportunities for handicapped individuals a right. The Act includes four main goals for the state and local governments:

the guarantee of access to special education programs for handicapped children
the guarantee of fairness and appropriateness in the decision-making process with regards to special educational programs
the establishment of concise supervision and auditing requirements/methods with regards to special education at all levels of government
the support of financial services to state and local governments through federal funding (Faas, 1979, p.14-15). The law requires Free (at no cost to the family of the student) Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

There is a two-pronged test created under the Act in order to determine a individual's eligibility to receive benefits.

Prong 1- Discern whether the individual has one or more of the disabilities listed in the definition.

The Act defines 'handicapped children' as "children who are mentally retarded, hard of hearing, deaf, speech impaired, visually handicapped, seriously emotionally disturbed, orthopedically impaired, other health impaired, deaf-blind, multi-handicapped, or as having specific learning disabilities, who because of those impairments need special education and related services" (Federal Register, August 23, 1977, Section 121a.5).

Prong 2 - determine whether or not the individual needs special education and related services.

The Act defines 'special education and related services' as "specially designed instruction at no cost to the parents, to meet the unique needs of a handicapped child, including classroom instruction in physical education, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions" (Federal Register, August 23, 1977, Section 121a.14). The 'related services' include transportation, speech therapy, audiological or hearing impaired services, psychological services for diagnosis and evaluation, augmentative or assistive devices, counseling and medical services. The Act requires that all handicapped individuals between the ages of 3-21 receive special education services and support.

P.L. 94-142's Individualized Education Programs (IEP):

Once an individual is determined handicapped and in need of special education or related service (as defined and determined by the two-prong test above), an Individualized Education Program (IEP) is then specifically created for that individual alone. Under P.L. 94-142, an Individualized Education Program is required for each handicapped student attending a public or private school requiring special education instruction or related services (Faas, 1979, p.37). The IEP is designed by the parents/or legal guardians of the child, the child, the teachers, non-handicapped and special, a local education agency representative who is trained in helping the handicapped student meet his/her needs, a member of the team that previously evaluated the student, and any other people that the parents/or guardians wish to invite. Each IEP must entail the following general items:

a description of the individual's present level of educational performance
a description of the individual's learning style and abilities
a general goal of achievement set for the child by the end of the academic school year
a statement of short-term objectives to help meet the year goals- these objectives must contain specific goals
a statement of all special educational related services/ necessary materials
specific dates describing exactly when the services will begin and end
a statement describing to what extent the child can participate in certain activities/lessons in non-handicapped classroom environments
a description of the type of education placement that the student will receive in the mainstreamed classroom
a list of the different individuals who will be responsible for implementing and maintaining the special education services
a description of the types of evaluations that will be used to assess the achievements of the short-term objectives and long-term goals (Faas, 1979, p.38-39).

Each child's IEP must take into account the learning styles of that child in order to create the most realistic annual and short-term goals. The IEP conference allows the teachers and child to talk. Through this discussion, the non-handicapped and/or special education teacher can gain an indication for the child's ability to process information, and therefore, generally determine what type of instructional learning is necessary.

It is the responsibility of the IEP committee to design the most effective IEP. Therefore, the committee must determine between the child's weaknesses and strengths, as well as motor, social and self-help skills. Through various assessment tests, observations and discussions, this information can be gathered. The desired outcome, is to be able to recognize the child's abilities in the following areas, and understand where improvement can be achieved:

Area 1: Reading Skills- readiness, comprehension, vocabulary, word attack
Area 2: Arithmetic Skills- addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, place value, money and decimals, measurement, fractions
Area 3: Language Arts Skills- handwriting, spelling, grammar, speech
Area 4: Perceptual Motor Skills- auditory and visual acuity, memory, sequencing, discrimination, association, eye-hand coordination, fine motor development
Area 5: Gross Motor Skills- large muscle activity, general physical health, body localization, directionality, laterality
Area 6: Social Skills- social acceptance, responsibility, self-control, self-concepts, general behavior, self-help skills (Faas, 1979, p.40-41).

Every IEP must include at least part of the day being spent in a mainstream classroom. This partial mainstreaming is done to:

remove stigma attached to handicapped students
improve handicapped students' social relationships and skills
provide handicapped students with non-handicapped models
create a richer and more competitive environment
help handicapped students learn to function in a mainstream society

P.L. 94-142's Least Restrictive and Most Productive Environments for Learning:

The Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) provision of P.L. 94-142 sets federal regulations for educating children in the least restrictive environment possible. The type of learning environment best suited for handicapped individuals can be categorized by a ladder-type structure. This hierarchy of services for handicapped individuals recognizes that "each program option restricts or segregates the problem learner from his or her age mates to a different degree" (Faas, 1979, p.52). The minimalist type of segregation occurs in the bottom step of the ladder and increases with each step up. The movement of the individual from a segregated special education day school to a non-handicapped classroom environment requires that the necessary services and abilities are available to allow for effective mainstreaming. Thus, the following advantages are gained at each level in the ladder structure (Faas, 1979, p.54-63):

Non-handicapped Classroom:

The largest group of handicapped individuals consists of mild disability cases that can be managed in the mainstream classroom. In this case, the mainstream teacher should have special training "in such areas as individualizing instruction, managing behavior, and correcting reading and arithmetic problems" (Faas, 1979, p.54).

The advantages of the mainstream classroom case are as follows:

Handicapped students are able to be fully mainstreamed with non-handicapped students.
Non-handicapped students have the opportunity to learn from the handicapped students and interact with them in both an academic and social environment.
The non-handicapped classroom is the least restrictive and most beneficial type of structure for handicapped students (with mild disabilities) to learn.

The disadvantages of the mainstream classroom are as follows:

Because many mildly handicapped students are automatically mainstreamed into non-handicapped classrooms, the overcrowding inhibits a teacher in providing individualized attention and instruction for the handicapped students.
The non-handicapped instructions/lessons might not be appropriate for handicapped students.
Mainstream classroom teachers can never fully be prepared to "work with students who have special needs that vary significantly from the needs of the other members of the classroom" (Faas, 1979, p.55).
The desired social integration of handicapped and non-handicapped students is not always achieved. Often handicapped students are rejected by their peer group (Faas, 1979, p.54-55).

Mainstream Classroom Placement with Consultation:

Many handicapped students can be enrolled in mainstream classrooms if the teacher is assisted by a special consultant. These consultants are usually district office staff members that provide assistance with educational diagnosis, design and improvement of the childÕs IEP, parent counseling, and the selection of the appropriate instructional method, materials and support services (Faas, 1979, p.55).

The advantages of mainstream classroom placement with consultation are as follows:

Handicapped students are able to be fully mainstreamed into a non-handicapped classroom, with minimal separation from their peers.
The non-handicapped students do not need to know that there is a consultant helping the non-handicapped teacher.
The mainstream teacher is able to provide attention for all of his/her students because of the consultant's assistance and role of continually monitoring the progress of the handicapped students.

The disadvantages of non-handicapped classroom placement with consultation are as follows:

The different materials or methods used in teaching the handicapped students offer an element of separation which often leads to rejection by peers.
The consultant assigned may not be familiar with the particular handicap of the student, and therefore, unable to provide the appropriate assistance to the mainstream teacher (Faas, 1979, p.55-56).

Mainstream Classroom Placement with Support Services:

Often, handicapped individuals with mild disabilities are able to be mainstreamed into a mainstream classroom as long as there is an additional support service in the form of supplementary teaching, tutoring, or treatment. This structure differs from the consultant case because the supplementary services are applied on a one-on-one basis. This combination of teaching, mainstream teacher and supplementary services, "makes it much easier for the tutor and the 'regular' (non-handicapped) classroom teacher to correlate their efforts" (Faas, 1979, p.56).

The advantages of mainstream classroom placement with support services are as follows:

Direct services are provided for handicapped students on a regular basis by someone with special training.
The assistance allows for the handicapped students to be in a mainstreamed classroom.
The mainstream teacher is able to have special assistance while still maintaining primary control of the classroom instruction.

The disadvantage of mainstream classroom placement with support services is as follows:

Special training tutors or therapists usually work in many schools, therefore he/she is usually overworked and may not be able to "help any one student significantly" (Faas, 1979, p.57).

Mainstream Classroom Attendance Plus Resource Room Services:

This structure recognizes the need for additional classroom assistance/services that cannot be provided in the mainstream classroom. Therefore, resource room and resource teacher services are provided in combination with mainstream classroom lessons. Handicapped students in this type of structure "receive most of their instruction from their 'regular' (non-handicapped) classroom teachers," and leave only for one or two periods for additional special instruction (Faas, 1979, p.57). The resource room is equipped with appropriate supplemental materials, and resource teachers are able to provide individualized attention to the handicapped student (Faas, 1979, p.57).

The advantages of mainstream classroom attendance plus resource room services are as follows:

Handicapped students are provided with special instructional help without being separated from their non-handicapped peers for a long period of time.
Handicapped student are able to benefit from mainstream classroom instruction through additional help and attention in the resource room.
The resource room also provides counseling and a continual assessment of the individual's classroom progress.

The disadvantage of mainstream classroom attendance plus resource room services is as follows:

While the handicapped student is in the resource room, he/she might miss valuable instruction or interaction with his/her peers.
There may be conflicts between the mainstream teacher and the resource room teacher. It is imperative that the two teachers are able to work together in order for the handicapped student to achieve the most successful performance.
The resource room has often become seen as a "cure-all" for handicapped students. Instead, it should be seen as a integral part of the mainstreaming process (Faas, 1979, p. 58-59).

Part-Time Special Classes:

Sometimes fully mainstreaming handicapped students is not possible. The part-time special class structure allows handicapped students to divide their time between mainstream classroom attendance and part-time special classes. In this structure, the handicapped student's primary learning takes place in the special classroom, and then "(he/she) leave(s) the special classrooms for a portion of each day to participate in selected parts of the 'regular' (non-handicapped) school program or for work-study experiences" (Faas, 1979, p.59). Special part-time teachers have the opportunity to devote all of their time to the handicapped students.

The advantages of part-time special classes are as follows:

Handicapped students have the security of their special classroom training that takes place in small classroom environments.
Handicapped students participate where they are most comfortable in mainstream classroom programs.
The special classroom allows one-on-one services "in those areas where special instruction is needed" (Faas, 1979, p.59).

The disadvantages of part-time special classes are as follows:

This structure inevitably creates a segregation between handicapped students and non-handicapped students. Mainstreaming handicapped students into specific mainstream programs is more apparent, and therefore, "problems are often encountered in gaining teacher and peer acceptance of special class students" (Faas, 1979, 59).

Full-Time Special Classes:

Those students whose handicaps are too severe for mainstreaming need full-time special class programs and environments. These students receive their instruction from specially trained teachers. These students usually are mainstreamed with non-handicapped students in a non-academic atmosphere, such as athletics, assembly programs, lunch, etc.

The advantages of full-time special classes are as follows:

Students have intensive full-day instruction and services by a specially trained teacher that are necessary for their disabilities.
The instructional program is individualized toward each student.
The segregation protects these severely handicapped students from ridicule and alienation that might occur in a non-handicapped classroom.

The disadvantages of full-time special classes are as follows:

While segregation does protect handicaped students from ridicule or possible alienation, it also "creates the need for eventual re-entry into the mainstream of the school or society" (Faas, 1979, p.60). Thus in this way the structure is unrealistic.
The absence of integration into a non-handicapped peer group "means that [handicapped] students do not have appropriate models on whom they can pattern behavior change" (Faas, 1979, p.60).

Special Day Schools:

Special day schools are usually located in large cities, and are geared toward handicapped students that have a "problem not generally found in the school-age population" (Faas, 1979, p.60).

The advantages of special day schools are as follows:

The special day schools' facilities and materials are specially designed to meet the needs of the student.
Special day schools are usually staffed with specially trained teachers and other supplemental teachers, all of whom have in-depth training and knowledge about the specific types of handicaps being served.

The disadvantages of special day schools are as follows:

Segregation further stigmatizes handicapped students.
Segregation deprives handicapped students from exposure to non-handicapped models as well as the experience of the 'real world.'
Most students must be bussed to these special day schools, thereby raising the cost of these schools (Faas, 1979, p.60-61).

Residential Schools:

Residential and institutional facilities are provided for severely handicapped individuals who need the support of 24 hour care, lodging, food, medical and educational services. The residential schools extend the educational learning to include areas of specialized treatment and aide.

The advantages of residential schools are as follows:

Specially trained staff members are available on a 24 hour basis to provide educational, medical or treatment services.
Residential schools help to remove the pressures from parents or other family members who the handicapped individual might otherwise be dependent upon.
Handicapped students are protected from the prejudices of the outside world.

The disadvantages of residential schools are as follows:

handicapped students must be removed from their homes in order to receive this special treatment. Thus, dependency shifts from family members to an institution.
This 24 hour service is very expensive and "inadequate funding often results in inadequate services and overcrowded facilities that are sometimes dehumanizing" (Faas, 1979, p.62).
It is easier to forget about these handicapped individuals since they are completely removed from the rest of the world. The consequence of this separation is that non-handicapped people can not benefit from the diversity these handicapped students would have provided; non-handicapped people have less of an opportunity to learn about handicaps (Faas, 1979, p.61-62).

Hospital Schools, Treatment Centers, and Homebound Instruction:

Handicapped individuals with severe disabilities may require hospitalization, treatment centers, or homebound instruction.

The advantages of hospital schools, treatment centers, and homebound instruction are as follows:

Students who are unable to attend any type of school, either because of accident or illness, recovery reasons or corrective surgery, are still able to receive instructional learning.
Academic success can boost the morale of an individual who is in the hospital.

The disadvantages of hospital schools, treatment centers, or homebound instruction are as follows:

Students often do not make substantial, consistent progress.
Students find it difficult to maintain contact with their age-level classmates (Faas, 1979, p.62-63). (Click here for further information about medication for students at "Medication for Education" site.)

Pivotal Court Cases

The court cases key to the reform of handicapped education do not necessarily involve handicapped disputes. Rather, they often address the more general principle that all individuals are entitled to an equitable education.

Brown v. Board of Education(1954):

Brown versus the Board of Education is a landmark court case in determining segregation illegal. The court ruled that "separate but equal" education is unconstitutional under the law. This decision by the Supreme Court "has been frequently cited in litigation relative to the right of an education for handicapped children" in that it sets precedence in support of mainstreaming (Abeson, 1976).

Mills v. Board of Education(1972):

Seven parents of handicapped children charged the Washington D.C. Board of Education, the Department of Human Services, and the mayor with failure to provide all handicapped children with free public education. The Court found that the school board was required to provide handicapped students with a "free and suitable publicly supported education regardless of the degree of mental, physical, or emotional disability" (Salomone, 1986, p.139).

Mills v. Board of Education(1972):

Neither the PARC nor Mills case defined the rights of handicapped children, they "sidestep(ped) the issue of whether the handicapped constitute a suspect class or whether education is a fundamental right" (Salomone, 1986, p.140). However, the inclusion of handicapped people into the civil rights movement bolstered reform in handicap education.

Board of Education, Sacramento City Unified School District vs. Rachel Holland(1992):

On March 2, 1992, Judge Levi upheld P.L. 94-142 when he ruled that Rachel Holland, a nine year old mildly mentally retarded student in the Sacramento City Unified School District, had the lawful right to participate in a non-handicapped classroom with support services (The Exceptional Parent, 1992, p.1). Judge Levi's decision was based on the requirement of P.L. 94-142 that students are placed in the least restrictive environment. In this ruling, he argued that placement in a special education program should occur only in the instance that the most appropriate support services or instruction cannot be offered in a mainstreamed classroom. He suggested curriculum modification as a means for accommodating Rachel's needs in the mainstreamed classroom. Judge Levi's decision demonstrated that P.L. 94-142 encompasses both the academic and social issues of handicapped education.

The decision of this case will help to "clarify the uncertainty and unevenness in the application of the law throughout the country" (The Exceptional Parent, 1992). Judge Levi's decision proved that IDEA's requirements were made to encompass both the academic and social factors of mainstreaming.

Government 375: Educational Reform and Ideology