 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
||||
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
|
||||
 |
|
||||
You
are here: Home
> Special Needs / Inclusion >
Inclusion >
Portraits of InclusionGo to Portraits of Inclusion: Table of Contents
| |
|
|
|
||
| |
|
|
|
||
| |
|
||||
| |
|
|
|||
| |
|
||||
| |
|
||||
You
are here: Home
> Special Needs / Inclusion >
Inclusion >
Portraits of Inclusion
Written and edited by Susan Janko and Alice Porter
With contributions by Kristen Anderson, Carolyn Cottam, Shouming Li, and Joan Lieber
Photographs by Barbara Witt
Graphic Design by Sandy Johnson
M a r c h 1 9 9 7
GLOSSARY
Advocacy organization: Advocates and advocacy organizations plead the cause of another, before lawmakers, courts, counselors and others.
Blended funding: The combining of federal, state, and local school district funds to finance services at the classroom and school level.
Chapter I program: Now officially "Title 1" of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Chapter 1 language refers to programs that improve opportunities for educationally deprived young children by helping them to succeed in school.
Discretionary funding: Public spending for which administrators exert some policy flexibility because its purpose is not strictly defined by federal or state statute.
Due process: A hearing for the resolution of conflicts regarding the educational identification, evaluation, or placement of a child.
Excess costs: The cost of educating special education students in excess of the funds provided for basic education.
Free appropriate public education (FAPE): A suitable education with emphasis on a student's special needs, provided at no cost to the parent or legal guardian.
Head Start: Federally mandated and financed preschool programs for low-income 3-5 year-olds. The federal law requires that 10% of Head Start enrollment be made available to children with disabilities.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B: The 1990 law, renaming and replacing the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act, that is the primary legislation mandating special education for all eligible children.
Inclusion: A policy that all children with disabilities will be served in the school or child care of parents' choosing in settings with non-disabled peers.
Least restrictive environment (LRE): An educational setting that is most like that in which children without disabilities are educated. In LRE, children receive a full continuum of services that is individually determined.
Means test: Criteria determining eligibility for publicly funded services.
Self-contained classroom: A classroom providing specialized training or instruction to pupils with disabling conditions.
Special education program eligibility: To qualify for special education services, children must have a disability and also meet eligibility requirements as defined by state administrative codes.
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act: The section of the 1973 federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of physical or mental handicaps in federally assisted programs.
Section 619 of IDEA: The section of the federal special education law that provides incentives for states to ensure FAPE to children ages 3 to 5 with disabilities.
REFERENCES
The following documents were used as source material for the policy sections of this report:
The Future of Children: Special Education for Students with Disabilities
Center for the Future of Children
The David and Lucile Packard Foundation,
Vol. 6, No. 1 Spring 1996Journey to Inclusion: A Resource Guide for State Policymakers
President's Council on Mental Retardation
Administration for Children and Families
U.S. Department of Welfare and Human Services
October 1995
Experience and Education
New York: Collier Books, 1963
Making it Happen: Examples of Good Practice in Special Needs Education and Community-based Programs
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Approaching Kindergarten: A Look at Preschoolers in the United States
Zill, N., Collins, M., West, J., and Hausken, E.G.
National Center for Education Statistics
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
U.S. Department of Education
Chartbook
Children and Youth with Disabilities in the United States
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, June 1994
1995 Kids Count Data Book
The Annie E. Casey Foundation
The Eagle Book: Washington State Training Manual
Washington State Parent/ Teacher Educator Partnership Project
October 1994 Edition
Outcomes in Special Education: What We Know and How We Could Know More
Washington State Institute for Public Policy
December 1994 Abstract
A Review of Federal Law Addressing the Education of Children with Disabilities
Washington State Institute for Public Policy, December 1994
Baumeister, A., Kupstas, F., and Klindworth, L.
"The New Morbidity: A National Plan of Action" American Behavioral Scientist
Vol. 34, No. 4, pages 468-500, March-April 1991
Dewey, J., in J. Boydston (Ed.)
The Later Works of John Dewey, 1925-1953.
Southern Illinois University Press, 1991
AFTERWORD T AKEN TOGETHER, THE TEN PORTRAITS IN THIS REPORT MAKE A SINGLE POINT: that all special education policies for young children inevitably amount to a child, in a classroom, reconciling his or her disability with the same needs all children have to learn, to have friends, to feel loved and valued.
The stories of some of the children in these pages -- those whose families, teachers, and communities work effectively together -- show that, given hard work and commitment, inclusive programs can meet these goals.
But for other children we have come to know in our research, inclusive early childhood programs are barely meeting the letter -- and not the spirit -- of federal and state special education policies. For the same system that pledges services to children with disabilities can also withhold them. The special education system may deny needed supports because of unsuccessful outreach, funding cutbacks, excessive regulation, inadequately prepared personnel, and the lack of political will to ensure that preschool environments address the needs of even the most vulnerable children.
To secure inclusive opportunities and needed services, many families relinquish the
opportunity to send their children to neighborhood schools (those who know they have this option). To place their children in inclusive settings for a few hours a day, families may endure complex schedules that keep children moving among a patchwork of services. And as many families attempt to access services that are guaranteed them under federal and state law, they experience frequent disappointment and lowered expectations.
Undoubtedly, progress has occurred in achieving inclusive environments in early childhood education. Most advocates for inclusion would allow that it remains a great challenge, but they suggest that we "measure up" from the isolation and institutionalization that characterized programs for children with disabilities only a generation ago, rather than "measure down" from the ideal articulated in public policies.
The words of these policies are still stirring. A "free appropriate public education" in the "least restrictive setting" has been the promise of U.S. special education policy for more shall two decades. For many children and families, that promise is beginning to be realized.
All the names of people, programs, and localities have been changed to protect the privacy of those involved. The photographs were taken at a variety of project sites and do not represent the children in the report.
This information is posted here with permission of
ECRII: The Early Childhood Institute for Research on Inclusion
and the project's previous principal investigator, Samuel Odom
slodom@unc.eduby New Horizons for Learning
http://www.newhorizons.org
E-mail: info@newhorizons.orgThis area of the website is made possible by a grant from the
Office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Special Education
P O Box 47200
Olympia, WA 98504-7200
(360) 725-6088
Fax (360)586-1631
E-mail: dgill@ospi.wednet.edu
