The regular education initiative (REI) is a thoughtful response to identified problems in our system for educating low-performing children, but it is not a detailed blueprint for changing the system. Educators must achieve consensus on what the REI actually proposes. The authors infer from the REI literature five assumptions regarding the roles and responsibilities of elementary regular classroom teachers, concluding that these teachers and specialists form a partnership, but the classroom teachers are ultimately in charge of the instruction of all children in their classrooms, including those who are not succeeding in the mainstream. A discussion of the target population and of several partnership models further delineates REI issues and concerns.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AffleckJ. Q.MadgeS.AdamsA., & LowenbraunS. (1988). Integrated classroom vs. resource model: Academic viability and effectiveness. Exceptional Children, 54(4), 339–348.
2.
AllingtonR. L., & JohnstonP. (1986). The coordination among regular classroom reading programs and targeted support programs. In WilliamsB. I.RichmondP. A., & MasonB. J. (Eds.), Designs for compensatory education: Conference proceedings and papers (VI, 3–40). Washington, DC: Research and Evaluation Associates, Inc.
3.
BraatenS.KauffmanJ. M.BraatenB.PolsgroveL., & NelsonC. M. (1988). The Regular Education Initiative: Patent medicine for behavioral disorders. Exceptional Children. 55(1), 21–27.
4.
BudoffM. (1988a). The study of the co-teaching or team teaching model (Progress Report #2). Cambridge, MA: Research Institute for Educational Problems, Inc.
5.
BudoffM. (1988b). The study of the co-teaching or team teaching model—The characteristics of teams that work and don't work (Progress Report #3). Cambridge, MA: Research Institute for Educational Problems, Inc.
6.
ChalfantJ.PyshM., & MoultrieR. (1979). Teacher assistance teams: A model for within-building problem solving. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 85–96.
7.
EgnerA. N., & LatesB. J. (1975). The Vermont consulting teacher program: A case presentation. In ParkerC. (Ed.), Psychological consultation: Helping teachers meet special needs (pp. 31–53). Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
8.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.ReederP.GilmanS.FernstromP.BahrM., & MooreP. (1989). Mainstream Assistance Teams: A handbook on prereferral intervention. Nashville, TN: Peabody College of Vanderbilt University.
9.
GartnerA., & LipskyD. K. (1989). The yoke of special education: How to break it. Rochester, NY: National Center on Education and the Economy.
10.
GreerJ. V. (1989). Partnerships: What is our contribution?Exceptional Children, 55(5), 391–393.
11.
HaynesM. C., & JenkinsJ. R. (1986). Reading instruction in special education resource rooms. American Educational Research Journal, 23(23), 161–190.
12.
Idol-MaestasL. (1981). A teacher training model: The resource/consulting teacher. Behavioral Disorders, 6, 108–121.
13.
Idol-MaestasL. (1983). Special educator's consultation handbook. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
14.
Idol-MaestasL.LloydS., & LillyM. S. (1981). Implementation of a non-categorical approach to direct service and teacher education. Exceptional Children, 48, 213–219.
15.
JenkinsJ. R., & HeinenA. (1989). Students' preference for service: Pull-out, in-class or integrated models. Exceptional Children, 55(6), 516–523.
16.
JenkinsJ. R., & JenkinsL. M. (1989). Educating handicapped and at-risk children in the regular education classroom: The Mount Vernon Model. Unpublished manuscript, Experimental Education Unit, University of Washington, Seattle.
17.
JenkinsJ. R.JewellM.LeicesterN. (1990). Development of a school building model for educating handicapped and at risk students in general education settings. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
18.
JenkinsJ. R., & LeicesterN. (1990). Specialized instruction within general education: Characterizing classroom teachers' approach to intervention. Unpublished manuscript, Experimental Education Unit, University of Washington, Seattle.
19.
JenkinsJ. R.PiousC. G., & PetersonD. L. (1988). Categorical programs for remedial and handicapped students: Issues of validity. Exceptional Children, 55(2), 147–158.
20.
JenkinsJ. R.PiousC. G., & PetersonD. L. (1990). Heterogeneity in reading levels in the mainstream classroom. Manuscript in preparation, Experimental Education Unit, University of Washington, Seattle.
21.
KameenuiE. J. (1989). The Regular Education Initiative: Realigning policy, pedagogy, and practice in special education. The Oregon Conference Monograph, 1, 10–13. (College of Education, University of Oregon.)
22.
KauffmanJ. M. (1989). The Regular Education Initiative as Reagan-Bush education policy: A trickle-down theory of education of the hard-to-teach. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia, Policy Analysis Center.
23.
LillyM. S. (1986). The relationship between general and special education: A new face on an old issue. Counterpoint, 6(1), 10.
24.
McKenzieH. (1972). Special education and consulting teachers. In ClarkF.EvansD., & HammerlynckL. (Eds.), Implementing behavioral programs for schools (pp. 103–125). Champaign, IL: Research Press.
25.
McKenzieH.EgnerA. N.KnightM. F.PerelmanP. F.SchneiderB. M., & GarvinJ. S. (1970). Training consulting teachers to assist elementary teachers in the management and education of handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 37, 137–143.
26.
NevinA., & ThousandJ. (1987). Avoiding or limiting special education referrals: Changes and challenges. In WangM. C.ReynoldsM. C., & WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Handbook of special education: Research and practice. Vol. 1: Learner characteristics and adaptive education (pp. 273–286). New York: Pergamon Press.
27.
PugachM. C., & JohnsonL. J. (1988). Rethinking the relationship between consultation and collaborative problem-solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 21(4), 1–8.
28.
ReynoldsM. C. (1988). A reaction to the JLD Special Series on the Regular Education Initiative. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(6), 352–356.
29.
ReynoldsM. C.WangM. C., & WalbergH. J. (1987). The necessary restructuring of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 53(5), 391–398.
30.
SchumakerJ. B., & DeshlerD. D. (1988). Implementing the Regular Education Initiative in secondary schools: A different ball game. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(1), 36–42.
31.
StainbackW., & StainbackS. (1984). A rationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51(2), 102–111.
32.
Teacher Education Division-Council for Exceptional Children. (1986). A statement by the Teacher Education Division-Council for Exceptional Children on the Regular Education Initiative. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
33.
WangM. C. (1980). Adaptive instruction: Building on diversity. Theory Into Practice, 19, 122–127.
34.
WangM. C. (1981). Mainstreaming exceptional children: Some instructional design and implementation considerations. Elementary School Journal, 81, 195–221.
35.
WangM. C.GennariP., & WaxmanH. C. (1985). The adaptive learning environments model: Design, implementation, and effects. In WangM. C. & WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Adapting instruction to individual differences (pp. 191–235). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
36.
WangM. C.ReynoldsM. C., & WalbergH. J. (1986). Rethinking special education. Educational Leadership, 44(1), 26–31.
37.
WangM. C.ReynoldsM. C., & WalbergH. J. (1987). Repairing the second system for students with special needs. Paper presented at the 1987 Wingspread Conference on The Education of Children with Special Needs: Gearing Up to Meet the Challenges of the 1990s. Racine, WI.
38.
WangM. C., & WalbergH. J. (1988). Four fallacies of segregationism. Exceptional Children, 55(2), 128–137.
39.
WillM. (1986). Educating students with learning problems—A shared responsibility. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education.
