Forty-three due process hearing officers representing three different occupational groups read behavioral vignettes describing 20 problem children and then selected one of eight possible educational placement alternatives. Possible alternatives ranged from regular class placement through residential school placement. Results indicated that placement decisions made by the three experimental groups were not significantly affected by the differences in occupational status. Implications of the findings and use of the data collection instrument for future research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (August 23, 1977). Education of Handicapped Children: Implementation of Part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Federal Register. Washington, DC.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 42474-42518.
2.
Ekstrand, R.E. (1979). Preparing for the due process hearing: What to expect and what to do. AMICUS, 4(2), 91-96.
3.
Gilliam, J.E. (1979). Contributions and status rankings of educational planning committee participants. Exceptional Children, 45, 466-468.
Guba, E.G. (1978). Toward a methodology of natural inquiry in education evaluation. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE) Monograph Series for Evaluation.
6.
Holland, R.P. (1980). An analysis of the decision-making processes in special education. Exceptional Children, 46, 551-554.
7.
Hull, C.H., & Nie, N.H. (1981). SPSS Update 7-9. New York: McGraw-Hill.
8.
Knoff, H.M. (1983a). Investigating disproportionate influence and status in multidisciplinary child study teams. Exceptional Children, 49, 367-370.
9.
Knoff, H.M. (1983b). Effect of diagnostic information on special education placement decisions. Exceptional Children, 49, 440-444.
10.
Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1973). Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information in judgment. In L. Rappaport & D.A. Summers (Eds.), Human judgment and social interaction . New York: Holt.
11.
Smith, T.E.C. (1981). Status of due process hearings. Exceptional Children, 48, 232-236.
12.
Stern, G. (1958). Classroom Integration Inventory. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Psychological Research Center.
13.
Turnbull, A.P., Strickland, B., & Turnbull, H.R. , III. (1981). Due process hearing officers : Characteristics, needs, and appointment criteria. Exceptional Children, 48, 48-54.
14.
Yoshida, R.K., Fenton, K.S., Maxwell, J.P., & Kaufman,M.J. (1978). Group decision making in the planning team: Myth or reality. Journal of School Psychology, 16, 237-244.
