Intradistrict parental choice programs are increasingly prevalent in the American educational landscape. How those programs include students with disabilities while maintaining compliance with federal special education statutes has received little attention This article addresses that issue. It provides a thorough legal analysis of the issues and examines the successes and failures of five major urban districts' attempts to achieve meaningful choice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Conrad, C. , Haworth J., & Millar, S. (1993). A silent success: Master's education in the United State. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
2.
Cudahy, T. (1991). Federal statutory requirements for accommodating handicapped students in school-choice programs.The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1991, 293-313.
3.
Daniel, P. (1993). A comprehensive analysis of educational choice: Can the polemic of legal problems be overcome?DePaul Law Review, 43, 1-96.
4.
Huefner, D. S. (1994). The mainstreaming cases: Tensions and trends for school administrators.Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(1), 27-55.
5.
McKinney, J. (1992). Special education and parental choice: An oxymoron in the making.Education Law Reporter, 76, 667-677.
6.
Mead, J. (1994). Including students with disabilities in parental choice programs: An examination of potential statutory conflict. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
7.
Mead, Julie E. (1995). Including students with disabilities in parental choice programs: The challenge of meaningful choice.West's Education Law Reporter, 100, 463-496.
8.
Merriam, S. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
9.
Murname, R. (1986). Family choice in public education: The roles of students, teachers, and system designers.Teachers College Record, 88(2), 169-189.
10.
Parkinson, J. (1992). Parents' unilateral placement of a disabled child in an unapproved private school: A"free appropriate public education?"Education Law Reporter, 76, 893-912.
11.
Underwood, J. (1991a). School choice and handicapped students.Educational Considerations, 19(1), 51-55.
12.
Underwood, J. (1991b). Choice in education: The Wisconsin experience.Education Law Reporter, 68, 229-239.
13.
Underwood, J. (1992). Choice is not a panacea.Education Law Reporter, 71, 599-608.
14.
Underwood, J. , &Mead, J. (1995).Legal aspects of special education and pupil services. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
15.
U.S. Department of Education . (1994). Characteristics of the 1K00 largest public elementary and secondary school districts in the United States: 1991-92. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
16.
Wong, M. (1993). The implications of school choice for children with disabilities.Yale Law Journal, 103, 827-859.
17.
Ysseldyke, J. , Thurlow, M., Algozzine, B., & Nathan, J. (1993). Open enrollment and students with disabilities: Issues, concerns, fears, and anticipated benefits.Exceptional Children, 59(5), 390-401.
