Spec ed 781 advanced studies in special education
Download
1 / 34

Spec Ed 781 Advanced Studies in Special Education - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 102 Views
  • Uploaded on

Spec Ed 781 Advanced Studies in Special Education. Summer 2005 Dr. Chiang. Major Components of the Course. Understanding Current Special Education Issues Awareness of critical issues & implications Research one selected topic to share with the rest of class by Powerpoint presentation

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Spec Ed 781 Advanced Studies in Special Education' - Olivia


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Spec ed 781 advanced studies in special education

Spec Ed 781Advanced Studies in Special Education

Summer 2005

Dr. Chiang


Major components of the course
Major Components of the Course

  • Understanding Current Special Education Issues

    • Awareness of critical issues & implications

    • Research one selected topic to share with the rest of class by Powerpoint presentation

  • Familiarity with Educational Statistics

    • Basic descriptive & inferential statistics

    • Using SPSS to analyze data


Required reading

Rethinking Special Education for a New Century, May 2001(http://www.edexcellence.net) A New Era: Revitalizing Special Education for Children and Their Families, July, 2002 The Death of Special Education, January 2001 Learning Disabilities: Severity, Inclusion, and Complexity, October 2000 Redefining LD as Inadequate Response to Instruction: The Promise and Potential Problems, 2003 Responsiveness to General Education Instruction as the First Gate to LD Identification, 2003

Required Reading


Chapter 1
Chapter 1

  • Special education complicating education reform

    • school choice

    • standards & accountability

  • A bright-line test to determine LRE

  • the importance of 1994 Title 1 reauthorization

  • current federal special education funding formula

    • December 1 unduplicated state headcounts (need-based funding)

    • Limited census-based funding


Chapter 11
Chapter 1

  • What is the current federal share of special education spending?

  • Disabled children cost about twice as much to educate as the non-disabled. Are you aware of this? How can we defend this cost? How can special education be made more cost effective?  

  • Comment on LD as a “sociological sponge to wipe up the spills of general education.”  

  • How can you defend against the criticism that special education complicates education reform? 

  • What flaws, if any, are there with the two-part test in determining what an “appropriate” education is?


Chapter 2
Chapter 2

  • Three unintended negative consequences of IDEA

    • Extraordinary growth of special ed enrollment due to funding incentive

    • Expanding cost of special ed at the expense of regular ed

    • Application of accommodation strategies resulting in a lifetime of entitlement


Chapter 2 continued
Chapter 2--continued

  • Five reasons for the out-of-control growth in special ed:

    • pressure from advocacy groups

    • continued growth of LD

    • the incentive to over-identify

    • recent education reform & high-stake tests

    • much less stigma attached to special ed

  • Accommodation & “differential advantages”


Chapter 2 continued1
Chapter 2--continued

  • Three special ed reform recommendations:

    • Disentangle special ed sub-populations

    • Reform special ed funding

    • Empower students to overcome their disabilities

  • Three restructured special ed categories:

    • children w/ significant sensory, cognitive, & physical disabilities

    • children w/ neurological dysfunction

    • children w/ behavioral problems

  • Criticism of census-based funding & possible solutions


Chapter 21
Chapter 2

  • In what ways have the 1991 federal policy clarification of ADD/ADHD and 1999 codification of OHI changed the special education landscape?  

  • Why have there been not more students exiting from special education programs upon re-evaluation? (Less than 12% currently, most of whom from Speech Language Impairment)  

  • Has special education over emphasized due process while overlooking student outcomes? If so, how can this problem be appropriately addressed?

  • Should school disciplinary rules be differentially applied to special education students or not? Defend your answer as persuasively as you can.  


Chapter 22
Chapter 2

  • Are we indeed systematically or inadvertently promoting a lifetime entitlement to special accommodations for students with mild impairments of LD, OHI, EBD? Why and why not? 

  • Develop your arguments in support of or opposing the three-category (instead of the current 13-category) classification system in special education. With this proposed new system, what role changes, if any, can we expect of the general education teachers?


Chapter 4
Chapter 4

  • Three basic hotly contested special ed policy issues:

    • testing accommodations

    • discipline and a double standard

    • scarcity and resource allocation

  • “value dilemmas” (Hallahan & Kauffman, 1994) -- “the tension between working toward eradicating or reducing disabilities while at the same time working toward helping the public to attach positive value to those who have a disability”


Chapter 4 continued
Chapter 4-continued

  • “It is plainly impossible to reward what we ultimately decide what is meritorious without implicitly penalizing those who lack the skills and virtues we value.” (p.79)

  • Impacts of placement decisions (EBD, OHI for ADD, LD), manifestation determination and different discipline policies: “forces districts to decide that a person is or is not a member of a protected class and then attaches certain strong privileges… to the class status.” (p.81)


Chapter 41
Chapter 4

  • Kelman argued that current special education policy issues have little to do with discrimination. Specifically, he cited three “hotly contested policy issues” -- accommodation, discipline, and resource allocation -- to argue his case. Counter-argue Kelman’s case by taking up these three issues one at a time.

    • Accommodation counterargument: 

    • Discipline counterargument: 

    • Resource allocation counterargument

  • To what extent are students with disabilities (especially marginal disabilities such as SLD and EBD) responding to interventions in your district/school/class? In general, are their responses satisfactory? If yes, to whom? If not, why not?


Chapter 7
Chapter 7

  • Implications of inclusion

    • “watering down the curriculum”

    • use of paraprofessionals

    • parental expectation & conflicts

  • “access to” and “progress in” general ed curriculum, what does it mean?

  • growth of special ed=school failure?

  • Districts reimbursed from federal Medicaid funds (since 1988) for certain special ed expenses (PT, health aide) for qualified children. Nationally, such reimbursement has increased dramatically.


Chapters 7 8
Chapters 7 & 8

  • One approach to control the growth of special education is to use it as a last resort after many options are tried. Discuss the feasibility as well as the potential problems of such an approach.

  • Within an inclusive setting, how can instruction for students with mild disabilities be delivered without watering down the curriculum?

  • 1997 Reauthorized IDEA requires special education students to have “meaningful access to the general education curriculum.” What is your interpretation of this requirement?


Chapter 8
Chapter 8

  • Implications of

    • extending the category of SDD to the federal maximum age of 9

    • decentralizing special ed to state, district, or school level

  • lawsuits, IDEA complaints, due process hearings, and mediations


Laurence lieberman articles
Laurence Lieberman articles

  • Students with LD are not the best candidates for inclusion, why?

    • continuum of severity vs. complexity

    • elementary vs. secondary school

  • What should be special ed’s “starting point”, the individual student or the general ed environment (curriculum, standard, & assessment)?

  • disability vs. handicap

  • accommodation (getting around disability) vs. remediation (going right at disability)


Lieberman
Lieberman

  • Do you agree with his claim that inclusion for students of learning disabilities “may be a simple (and risky) way of dealing with a very complicated problem”? Explain your position.

  • He asserted that “a disabled child was not disabled because he was failing in school; he was failing in school because he was disabled.” Interpret his assertion and share your own thoughts on this statement. 

  • Has the “I in IDEA and the I in IEP” indeed become “virtually nonexistent”? Support your observations with evidences.

  • Explain Lieberman’s view on prevention of special education (handicap vs. disability).


Response to instruction model
Response-to-instruction model

  • Four required components

    • On-going progress monitoring assessment procedures

    • Adequate info about effective instruction

    • General education commitment to supplemental programs for at-risk students

    • A means for screening & tracking the progress of a large number of students

  • Two approaches to eliminate environmental variables as a viable explanation for academic failure

    • Problem-solving by manipulating instruction via adaptations to general education

    • Intensive prevention trials and indexing student responsiveness

  • The dual discrepancy of level & slope (growth or progress) and treatment validity


Chapter 12
Chapter 12

Facts about LD

  • Early intervention and prevention can reduce up to 70% of children with reading problems in special ed or compensatory programs.

  • The largest increase among LD is between age 12 and 17 (upper elementary to middle school).


Chapter 12 continued
Chapter 12-continued

Rethinking LD:

  • Develop new definition for LD/reading, LD/language arts, LD/reading comprehension, LD/math etc.

  • Environment, including instruction, can impact development of neural systems.

  • The IQ-Achievement discrepancy makes early identification difficult and results in a “wait-to-fail” model.

  • The current negative definition (in terms of the exclusion clause) has many drawbacks.


Chapter 12 continued1
Chapter 12-continued

Rethinking LD:

  • “LD has served as a sociological sponge that attempts to wipe up general education’s spills and cleans its ills.”

  • Target resources at early, intensive, evidence-based interventions rather than expensive eligibility determination practice.

  • Many children identified as LD are actually “teaching disabled.” Improve the capacity of teachers and schools to implement sound early interventions, not change criteria.

  • Expand the use of SDD to age 9.


Chapter 121
Chapter 12

  • The authors claimed that the IQ-achievement discrepancy, when employed as the primary criterion for LD eligibility decision making, may well harm more children than it helps. What are the problems with the IQ-achievement discrepancy?

  • The authors made an evidence-based argument for early identification, prevention, and early intervention. What specific evidences did they cite?


Conclusions
Conclusions

8 policy failures identified for special education:

  • Preventable & remediable conditions grow into intractable problems.

  • It keeps expanding such its goals become unattainable, its operation impossibly complex & costly, and its purpose clouded.

  • Its one-size-fits-all approach has created a legal & policy straightjacket.

  • The IDEA creates perverse incentives for educators and schools.


Conclusions continued
Conclusions-continued

5. Parents have perverse incentives, too.

  • As the largest unfunded federal mandate in K-12 education, it distorts the priority & fractures the programmatic coherence of schools and school systems.

  • Different rules for disabled children foster a “separate but unequal” education system.

    8. It collides with standards-based reform, exempting many students (and indirectly educators/schools) from meeting state or district academic standards.


Conclusions continued1
Conclusions-continued

Six Principles for Special Ed Reform:

  • Make the IDEA standards- and performance-based, wherever possible.

  • Streamline number of categories into a few very broad groupings.

  • Focus on prevention & early intervention, wherever possible.

  • Encourage flexibility, innovation, & choices.

  • Provide adequate funding to ensure program success.

  • End double standards, wherever possible.


Chapter 3
Chapter 3

  • Three types of accountability models:

    • compliance (bureaucracy, regulatory), emphasizing process & documentation

    • competition (market), emphasizing outcomes or results, and consumer choice

    • community (clan) emphasizing shared norms and values (e.g. Catholic schools)

  • In special ed, the accountability system tend to combine elements of more than one model. How so?


Chapter 3 continued
Chapter 3--continued

  • Three factors contributing to the compliance model is special ed programs:

    • sympathy

    • organizational culture

    • fear of litigation

  • The OSEP’s monitoring system leaves the fox to guard the henhouse. How so?

  • To what extent does IDEA ‘97 address effectiveness & accountability?


Chapter 5
Chapter 5

  • Special ed incidence rate and

    • poverty

    • race (percentages of minority students)

    • per pupil expenditure

  • Urban districts have lower % of special ed students because

    • they lack resources(??)

    • they are less competent in identifying

    • minority parents’ reluctance to place

    • social integration (?)


Chapter 9
Chapter 9

  • Increase in special ed preschool (3-5) enrollment

  • Major causes of rising special ed costs:

    • changes in medical practice

    • deinstitutionalization & privatization

    • increases in children in poverty & families experiencing social and economic stress


Chapter 10
Chapter 10

  • Possible amendments to IDEA (due process):

    • Limiting attorneys’ fees

    • Establishing an IDEA statue of limitations

    • Train judges as hearing officers

    • Limiting the duration and scope of the process


Chapter14
Chapter14

  • Three principles guiding redesign of special ed policy:

    • an obsession with results

    • have access to a big toolbox

    • residual rules that provide a safety net

  • To substitute for compliance model, create a system of performance incentive for

    • effective intervention

    • effective remediation

    • effective prevention


Chapter 14 continued
Chapter 14-continued

  • What is

    • “gaming the numbers?”

    • “information-based approach?”

    • “one-size-fits-all” compliance system?

  • Which procedures are dispensable (not included as residual requirements)?

    • each student has an IEP

    • specific components of IEP

    • placement in LRE


Chapter 14 continued1
Chapter 14-continued

  • Which procedures are suggested to be residual base of essential compliance obligations?

    • identify and assess

    • establish annual goals & report the results

    • involve and inform parents

    • monitor compliance


ad