Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Implicit Assumptions in Special Education Policy: Promoting Full Inclusion for Students with Learning Disabilities

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Child & Youth Care Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Everyday millions of students in the United States receive special education services. Special education is an institution shaped by societal norms. Inherent in these norms are implicit assumptions regarding disability and the nature of special education services. The two dominant implicit assumptions evident in the American educational system are the view that disability is deviant and should be eradicated and the assumption that all special services should be delivered in a separate environment.

Methods

A review of literature was conducted to reveal trends in special education. In particular, inclusive practices, Response to Intervention (RTI), and student achievement were examined.

Conclusion

This paper argues that while federal policy was created in an effort to promote access to general education, the practices of our educational institutions perpetuate isolation. New assumptions must be created to promote access and equality for students with learning disabilities. True inclusion, where students with learning disabilities are fully included in the general education classroom, can help to reinforce new assumptions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abberley, P. (1987). The concept of oppression and the development of a social theory of disability. Disability, Handicap and Society, 2(1987), 5–19.

  • Albus, D., Lazarus, S. S., & Thurlow, M. L. (2015). 2012-13 publicly reported assessment results for students with disabilities and ELLs with disabilities (Technical Report 70). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.

  • Allday, R. A., Duhon, G. J., Blackburn-Ellis, S., & Van Dycke, J. L. (2010). The biasing effects of labels on direct observation by preservice teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children

  • Andrews, J. E., Carnine, D. W., Coutinho, M. J., Edgar, E. B., Forness, S. R., Fuchs, L. S., et al. (2000). Bridging the special education divide. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 258–267. doi:10.1177/074193250002100501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, C. (1997). A legacy of oppression: A history of disability in western culture. In L. Barton, & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disability studies: Past, present, and future (pp. 3–24). Leeds: The Disability Press.

  • Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1996). Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the national longitudinal transition study. Exceptional Children, 62(5), 399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). College enrollement and work activity of 2013 high school graduates (News Release No. USDL-14-0657)U.S. Department of Labor.

  • Campbell, F. A. K. (2008). Exploring internalized ableism using critical race theory. Disability & Society, 23(2), 151–162. doi:10.1080/09687590701841190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campolieti, M., Fang, T., & Gunderson, M. (2010). Labour market outcomes and skill acquisition of high-school dropouts. Journal of Labor Research, 31(1), 39–52. doi:10.1007/s12122-009-9074-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christ, T. J., Zopluoglu, C., Long, J. D., & Monaghen, B. D. (2012). Curriculum-based measurement of oral reading: Quality of progress monitoring outcomes. Exceptional Children, 78(3), 356–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciolfi, A. A. (2011). Race and response-to-intervention in special education. Howard Law Journal, 54(2), 303–341.

  • Cosier, M., Causton-Theoharis, J., & Theoharis, G. (2013). Does access matter? Time in general education and achievement for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 34(6), 323–332. doi:10.1177/0741932513485448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, J., Keesey, S., Alber-Morgan, S. R., & Wheaton, J. (2013). The effects of computer-assisted instruction using kurzweil 3000 on sight word acquisition for students with mild disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(2), 87–103. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2010). Attitudes of parents towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 25(2), 165–181. doi:10.1080/08856251003658694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(3), 331–353. doi:10.1080/13603110903030089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeNavas-Walk, C., & Proctor, B. (2015). Income and poverty in the United States: 2014. (No. P60-252). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  • Detrich, R., & Lewis, T. (2013). A decade of evidence-based education: Where are we and where do we need to go? Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 15(4), 214–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doren, B., Murray, C., & Gau, J. M. (2014). Salient predictors of school dropout among secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(4), 150–159. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espin, C., Wallace, T., Lembke, E., Campbell, H., & Long, J. D. (2010). Creating a progress-monitoring system in reading for middle-school students: Tracking progress toward meeting high-stakes standards. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(2), 60–75. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00304.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erevelles, N. (2000). Educating unruly bodies: Critical pedagogy, disability studies, and the politics of schooling. Educational Theory, 50(1), 25–47. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.2000.00025.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th Anniversary Edition). New York: Bloomsbury.

  • Fontana, K. C. (2005). The effects of co-teaching on the achievement of eighth grade students with learning disabilities. Journal of at-Risk Issues, 11(2), 17–23. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=507814793&site=ehost-live&scope=site

  • Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Bryant, J., & Davis, G. N. (2008). Making “secondary intervention” work in a three-tier responsiveness-to-intervention model: Findings from the first-grade longitudinal reading study of the national research center on learning disabilities. Reading and Writing, 21(4), 413–436. doi:10.1007/s11145-007-9083-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76(3), 301–323. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ879545&site=ehost-live&scope=site; http://www.cec.sped.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Current_Issue2&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.cfm&TPLID=22&ContentID=4604

  • Grigorenko, E. L. (2008). Educating individuals with disabilities: IDEIA 2004 and beyond. New York: Springer Pub.

  • Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625–638. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hang, Q., & Rabren, K. (2009). An examination of co-teaching: Perspectives and efficacy indicators. Remedial and Special Education, 30(5), 259–268. doi:10.1177/0741932508321018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, H. (1986). Public support for rehabilitation programs: The analysis of U. S. disability policy. Disability, Handicap and Society, 1(2), 121–137. doi:10.1080/02674648666780131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haring, N. G. (1975). Educational services for the severely and profoundly handicapped. Journal of Special Education, 9(4), 425–433. doi:10.1177/002246697500900410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory into Practice, 50(1), 4–11. doi:10.1080/00405841.2011.534909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kena, G., Aud, S., Johnson, F., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Rathbun, A., et al. (2014). The condition of education 2014. NCES 2014-083. National Center for Education Statistics

  • Kena, G., Musu-Gillete, L., Robinson, J., Wang, X., Rathbun, A., Zhang., et al. (2015). The condition of education 2015 No. NCES 2015-144). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

  • Klingner, J. K., & Edwards, P. A. (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 108–117.

  • Kortering, L. J., McClannon, T. W., & Braziel, P. M. (2008). Universal design for learning: A look at what algebra and biology students with and without high incidence conditions are saying. Remedial and Special Education 29(6), 352–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lackaye, T. D., & Margalit, M. (2006). Comparisons of achievement, effort, and self-perceptions among students with learning disabilities and their peers from different achievement groups. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 432–446. doi:10.1177/00222194060390050501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lackaye, T., Margalit, M., Ziv, O., & Ziman, T. (2006). Comparisons of Self-Efficacy, mood, effort, and hope between students with learning disabilities and their Non-LD-Matched peers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(2), 111–121. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00211.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lalvani, P. (2013). Privilege, compromise, or social justice: Teachers’ conceptualizations of inclusive education. Disability and Society, 28(1), 14–27. doi:10.1080/09687599.2012.692028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Special Education Research. (2005). Facts from NLTS2: High school completion by youth with disabilities. Institute of Education Sciences.

  • O’Connor, C., & Fernandez, S. D. (2006). Race, class, and disproportionality: Reevaluating the relationship between poverty and special education placement. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 6–11. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.temple.edu/stable/3876747

  • Ohan, J. L., Visser, T. A. W., Strain, M. C., & Allen, L. (2011). Teachers’ and education students’ perceptions of and reactions to children with and without the diagnostic label “ADHD”. Journal of School Psychology, 49(1), 81–105. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2010.10.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raffa, M. F. (1985). Removing architectural barriers: The architectural barriers act of 1968. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter, 9(4), 304–308.

  • Rea, P. J., McLaughlin, V. L., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 203–222. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/201226375?accountid=14270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reschly, D. J. (2014). Response to intervention and the identification of specific learning disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 34(1), 39–58. doi:10.1097/TLD.0000000000000003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J. E. (2013). Poverty as disability and the future of special education law. Georgetown Law Journal, 101(6), 1455.

  • Scanlon, D., & Mellard, D. F. (2002). Academic and participation profiles of school-age dropouts with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shifrer, D. (2013). Stigma of a label: Educational expectations for high school students labeled with learning disabilities. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 54(4), 462–480. doi:10.1177/0022146513503346.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shifrer, D., Callahan, R. M., & Muller, C. (2013). Equity or marginalization?: The high school course-taking of students labeled with a learning disability. American Educational Research Journal, 50(4), 656–682. doi:10.3102/0002831213479439.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Shifrer, D., Muller, C., & Callahan, R. (2011). Disproportionality and learning disabilities: Parsing apart race, socioeconomic status, and language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(3), 246–257. doi:10.1177/0022219410374236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silio, M. C., & Barbetta, P. M. (2010). The effects of word prediction and text-to-speech technologies on the narrative writing skills of hispanic students with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(4), 17–32. doi:10.1177/016264341002500402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. A. (2011). Universal design for learning: Assistance for teachers in today’s inclusive classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, T. D., Petersen, D. B., & Adams, J. L. (2015). Tier 2 language intervention for diverse preschoolers: An early-stage randomized control group study following an analysis of response to intervention. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 24(4), 619–636. doi:10.1044/2015_AJSLP-14-0101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay, P. (2013). Comparative outcomes of two instructional models for students with learning disabilities: Inclusion with co-teaching and solo-taught special education. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 13(4), 251–258. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2012.01270.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Congress. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (2014). Fulfilling the promise: Overcoming persistent barriers to economic self-sufficiency for people with disabilities.

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2014). 36th annual report to congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2014. Washington DC.

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2015). 37th Annual report to congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Act, 2015. Washington D.C.

  • Van Der Heyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Gilbertson, D. (2007). A multi-year evaluation of the effects of a response to intervention (RTI) model on identification of children for special education. Journal of School Psychology, 45(2), 225–256. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.11.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., & Garza, N. (2006). An overview of findings from wave 2 of the national longitudinal transition study-2 (NLTS2). NCSER 2006-3004. National Center for Special Education Research

  • Weigert, S. C. (2012). Aligning and inventing practices to achieve inclusive assessment policies: A decade of work toward optimal access for US students with disabilities 2001–2011. International Journal of Disability, Development & Education, 59(1), 21–36. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2012.654935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolbring, G. (2008). The politics of ableism. Development, 51(2), 252–258. doi:10.1057/dev.2008.17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodcock, S., & Vialle, W. (2011). Are we exacerbating students’ learning disabilities? An investigation of preservice teachers’ attributions of the educational outcomes of students with learning disabilities. Annals of Dyslexia, 61(2), 223–241. doi:10.1007/s11881-011-0058-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yell, M. L., Rogers, D., & Rogers, E. L. (1998). The legal history of special education: What a long, strange trip it’s been. Remedial and Special Education, 19(4), 219–228. doi:10.1177/074193259801900405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zablocki, M., & Krezmien, M. P. (2013). Drop-out predictors among students with high-incidence disabilities: A national longitudinal and transitional study 2 analysis. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 24(1), 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zettel, J. J., & Ballard, J. (1979). The education for all handicapped children act of 1975 PL 94-142: Its history, origins, and concepts. Journal of Education, 161, 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Moira Kirby

Authors
  1. Moira Kirby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moira Kirby.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kirby, M. Implicit Assumptions in Special Education Policy: Promoting Full Inclusion for Students with Learning Disabilities. Child Youth Care Forum 46, 175–191 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-016-9382-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-016-9382-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation