Continuum of Placement for Students with Special Needs

Continuum of Placement for Students with Special Needs

I. Inclusion remains a controversial concept in education because it relates to our educational and social values, including how we perceive those with disabilities. There are strong advocates on both sides of the issue and it is one that is yet to be resolved by local or state education authorities.
“The debate over the inclusion of students with disabilities not only concerns
Disagreements in following IDEA’S requirements of a FAPE, LRE, AND IEP, but also takes into account conflicting educational theories of attainment. Supporters and dissenters
to the full inclusion movement view the education of students with disabilities from
different perspectives and have opposing interpretations concerning the purpose
behind the educational system. “Gordon, S. “Making Sense of the Inclusion Debate
Under IDEA”, BYU Law Journal, 189-225.

Clearly, this is an issue that is far from settled. A simple review of case law from the various
Federal circuit courts indicates that the debate surrounding inclusion and the factors that
must be considered is far from established. The controversy over the best educational
placement for students with disabilities continues to be debated, and the best that advice
to districts and professionals considering placement issues is to consider that the IDEA
was not intended as a “one-size-fits-all” approach to educational placement. Gordon, pg 222.

II.
Definitions in order to discuss the concept of inclusion it is necessary to first have a common basis of reference.

1) Mainstreaming – Selective placement of special education student in one or more “regular education classes”. Generally a student must “earn” the opportunity to be placed in the general education classroom and must “keep up” with the assigned work.
2) Inclusion – is a term that attempts to educate the student to the maximum extent appropriate in the school classroom that he/she would otherwise attend. It involves bringing support services to the student, rather than separating the student to a specialized classroom.
3) Full Inclusion – All students will be in the regular classroom program full time regardless of the disability and all services will be provided in the regular education classroom Research Bulletin 11, 1993 Phi Delta Kappa’s Center for Evaluation, Development and Research.

III. Does Federal Law Require Inclusion? Two federal laws govern education of children with disabilities the IDEA 1997, 2004 and the Rehabilitation Act of (1973).
1) The IDEA as amended in 2004 does not require inclusion. Instead, the law requires that children with disabilities be educated in the “least restrictive environment appropriate” to meet their “unique needs”. Indeed, the IDEA does presume that the least restrictive analysis will begin with the placement in the regular classroom.
a) IDEA requires school districts to “have a continuum of placements”
2) Rehabilitation Act of 1973 – Section 504 requires that a recipient of federal funds provide for education of each qualified handicapped person with persons who are not handicapped to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the handicapped person

IV. Court Guidelines for Placement The IDEA and the Rehabilitation Act leave many questions unanswered that the local school districts must determine themselves. Through litigation some guidance has been given by the following case law.
1) Greer vs. Rome City School District (11th Circuit, 1992) – finding, “Before the school district may conclude that a handicapped child should be educated outside of the regular classroom it must consider whether supplemental aids and services would permit satisfactory education in the regular classroom.” The Court made an additional finding that the school district cannot refuse to serve a child because of added cost. However no clear directions or determination was made about what costs are reasonable and what is excessive.
2) Sacramento City Unified School District vs. Holland (9th Circuit, 1994) - in this case the Court established a four part balancing test to determine whether a school district is complying with the IDEA. The four factors are as follows:
a) The educational benefits of placing the child in a full time regular education program
b) The non-academic benefits of such a placement
c) The effect the child would have on the teacher and other students in the regular classroom.
d) The costs associated with this placement.
3) Oberti vs. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District (3rd Circuit Court, 1993) in determining appropriate placement the court ruled that three factors must be considered.
a) The court should consider whether the district made reasonable efforts to accommodate the child in regular education. The school must “consider the whole range of supplemental aids and services…”
b) The Court should compare the educational benefits the child would receive in regular education with supplemental aids and serves compared to the educational benefits in a special education classroom.
c) The Court should consider the effect the inclusion of the child with disabilities might have on the education of other children in the regular education classroom.
• Interestingly here the Court is imposing its view of educational benefits
V. Studies on Placement demonstrating benefit of inclusion:
a) Kavale, K.A., Glass, G.V. “The Efficacy of Special Education Interventions and Practices.” A Compendium of Meta-Analysis Findings.” Focus on Exceptional Children (1982) 1-14
b) Wang, M.C. Reynolds, M.C., Walberg H.J. “Serving Students Needs at the Margins” Educational Leadership (1988) 12-17
c) Carlberg, C., Kavale, K., The Efficacy of Special versus Regular Class Placement for Exceptional Children” A Meta Analysis” The Journal of Special Education (1980) 295-305.
d) The Council on Exceptional Children, Position Paper (1993).


This is legal information only, not legal advice!
The above listed information about special education law is for general information only. General legal information is not the same as legal advice -- which requires the application of law to an individual's specific circumstances. Although I believe the information to be accurate and useful, I strongly recommend that you consult a lawyer if you want professional advice regarding your specific legal situation and do not rely solely on the information provided above.