The purpose of this discussion is to describe and contrast several tenets of scientific behavior and practice with the behaviors and practices associated with advocacy. We argue that scientists must focus their efforts on solvable problems, consider their efforts to be uncertain, and present their findings dispassionately, so that others might judge the evidence for themselves. Advocates, in contrast, must confront the problems facing the people for whom they have concern over whether the problems appear to be solvable or not. Furthermore, advocacy requires a certainty of conviction that leads to the promotion of particular positions and their adoption by others. We suggest that although special education's roots are more closely aligned with advocacy than with science, its future depends on its ability to adopt a more fully scientific approach to practice. We conclude with a discussion of how the assignment of test accommodations to students with disabilities illustrates the tension between science and advocacy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Berliner, D.C., & Biddle, B.J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America's public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2.
Blackmore, S. (1999). The meme machine. New York : Oxford University Press.
3.
Brigham, M.M., Brigham, F.J., & Lloyd, J.W. (2002, November). Accommodations and assessment: Supporting, distracting, or enabling?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Teacher Educators of Children with Behavior Disorders , Scottsdale, AZ.
4.
Brodie, R. (1996). Virus of the mind: The new science of the meme . Seattle, WA: Integral Press.
5.
Cooper, H.M., & Hedges, L.V. (1994). The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
6.
Cuban, L. (2000). Why is it so hard to get “good” schools? In L. Cuban & D. Shipps (Eds.), Reconstructing the common good in education: Coping with intractable American dilemmas (pp. 148—169). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7.
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
Feynman, R.P. (1999a). Cargo cult science: Some remarks on science, pseudoscience, and learning how not to fool yourself. In J. Robbins (Ed.), The pleasure of finding things out: The best short works of Richard P. Feynman (pp. 205—223). Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
9.
Feynman, R.P. (1999b). What is and should be the role of scientific culture in modern society. In J. Robbins (Ed.), The pleasure of finding things out: The best short works of Richard P. Feynman (pp. 97—115). Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
10.
Forness, S.R. (2002). Foreword. In J. M. Kauffman (Ed.), Educational deform: Bright people sometimes say stupid things about education (pp. v—vi). Lanham, MD: Scare-crow Press.
11.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Helping teachers formulate sound test accommodation decisions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 174—181.
12.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Eaton, S.B., Hamlett, C., Binkley, E., & Crouch, R. (2000). Using objective data sources to enhance teacher judgments about test accommodations. Exceptional Children , 67, 67—81.
13.
Glassner, B. (1999). The culture of fear: Why Americans are afraid of the wrong things. New York: Basic Books.
14.
Hammond, K.R. (1996). Human judgment and social policy: Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice. New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
Hyman, R. (2002). Why and when are smart people stupid? In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Why smart people can be so stupid (pp. 1—23). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16.
Kauffman, J.M., McGee, K., & Brigham, M.M. (in press). Enabling or disabling? Observations on changes in the purposes and outcomes of special education. Phi Delta Kappan.
17.
Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (1987). Substance over style: Assessing the efficacy of modality testing and teaching. Exceptional Children, 54, 228—239.
18.
Kelman, M., & Lester, G. (1997). Jumping the queue: An inquiry into the legal treatment of students with learning disabilities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
Lynch, A. (1996). Thought contagion: How belief spreads through society. New York: Basic Books.
20.
Martinez, E.A., & Hallahan, D.P. (1999). Some thoughts on international perspectives in special education, with special attention to the research-to-practice gap. Exceptionality, 8, 305—311.
21.
Meier, D. (2002). In schools we trust: Creating communities of learning in an era of testing and standardization. Boston: Beacon Press.
22.
Nichols, A.S., & Sosnowsky, F.L. (2002). Burnout among special education teachers in self-contained cross-categorical classrooms. Teacher Education and Special Education, 25, 71—86.
23.
Rockoff, J.D. (2003, March 6). Balto Co. schools err in testing process . Baltimore Sun, p. 1B.
24.
Showalter, E. (1997). Hystories: Hysterical epidemics and modern culture . London: Picador.
25.
Shulman, L.S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching. In M. C. Wittrock & American Educational Research Association (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp.3—36). New York: Macmillan.
26.
Sternberg, R.J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Stone, D. (1997). Policy paradox: The art of political decision-making . New York: Norton.
28.
Sunstein, C.R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
