Major principles underlying school choice—such as market competition and parental autonomy—are in serious tension with the principles underlying inclusion from both philosophical and legal perspectives. In this article, the authors explicate this tension and then examine the empirical evidence indicating that exclusion of students with special needs, particularly by schools that market themselves on the basis of test scores, has been a result of the implementation of school choice. The authors suggest that school choice has turned back the clock by once again encouraging public schools to exclude students with special needs on the ground that educating such students is beyond the scope of their mission.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ahearn, E.M. (1999). Charter schools and special education: A report on state policies. Washington DC: Office of Special Education Programs. Retrieved April 12, 2002, from http://www.uscharterschools.org/pub/uscs_docs/fr/sped_policies.htm
2.
Arsen, D., Plank, D., & Sykes, G. (1999). School choice policies in Michigan: The rules matter. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
3.
Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982).
4.
Boulder Valley School District, 2001. October count. Boulder, CO: Author .
Colorado Department of Education. (2000). The 1998-99 Colorado charter schools evaluation. Denver : Author. Retrieved April 12, 2002 , from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdechart/download/ch99eall.pdf
7.
Dewey, D. (1996, December 11). On the role of government in education. Remarks at the Inaugural Thomas B. Fordham Foundation Luncheon. Retrieved April 12, 2002, from http://www.edexcellence.net/library/dewey.html
8.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
9.
Garn, G.A. (2000, October 12). Arizona charter schools: A case study of values and school policy [Electronic version]. Current Issues in Education, 3(7).
10.
Heubert, J.P. (1997). Schools without rules? Charter schools, federal disability law, and the paradoxes of deregulation. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 32, 301—353.
11.
Howe, K.R. (1997). Understanding equal educational opportunity: Social justice, democracy and schooling. New York: Teachers College Press.
12.
Howe, K.R., & Eisenhart, M. (2000). A study of the Boulder Valley School District's open enrollment system. (Tech. Rep.)Boulder, CO: Authors.
13.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
14.
McKinney, J.R. (1996). Charter schools: A new barrier for children with disabilities. Educational Leadership, 54(22), 22—25.
15.
McLaughlin, M.J., Henderson, K., & Ullah, H. (1996). Charter schools and students with disabilities . Alexandria, VA: Center for Policy Research.
16.
Mills v. Board of Education, 348 F.Supp. 866 (D.D.C. 1972).
17.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.
18.
Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth, 343 F.Supp. 279 (E.D. Pa. 1972).
19.
Richman, S. (1995). Separating school & state: How to liberate America's families. Fairfax, VA: Future of Freedom Foundation.
20.
SRI International. (1997). Evaluation of charter school e fectiveness. Menlo Park, CA: Author.
21.
UCLA Charter School Study. (1998). Beyond the rhetoric of charter school reform: A study of ten California school districts. Los Angeles: Author.
22.
U.S. Department of Education (2000). The state of charter schools 2000: Fourth-year report. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved April 12, 2002, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/charter4thyear/
23.
Vanourek, G., Manno, B.V., Finn, C.E., & Bierlein, L.A. (1997). Charter schools in action project, Final report: The educational impact of charter schools. Retrieved from http://www.edexcellence.net/chart/chart5.htm
24.
Welner, K.G. (2001). Legal rights, local wrongs: When community control collides with educational equity. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
25.
Welner, K.G., & Howe, K.R. (in press). Steering toward separation: The evidence and implications of special education students' exclusion from choice schools. In J. Scott (Ed.), School choice and diversity . New York: Teachers College Press .
26.
Zollers, J., & Ramanathan, K. (1998, December). For-profit charter schools and students with disabilities: The sordid side of the business of schooling. Phi Delta Kappan, pp. 297—304.
27.
Zollers, N. (2000). Schools need rules when it comes to students with disabilities. Education Week, 19(25), 46.
