The Regular Education Initiative: A Force for Change in General and Special Education

Abstract

Much of what is written here will be threatening and the source of discomfort for many readers. Such discomfort is understandable. Change is inevitable, but never easy. The changes embodied in the “regular education initiative” are, in fact, the culmination of nearly one hundred years of development of special education in the United States. Most of that historical change and development has been incremental. The next steps involve reconceptualization and modification of some of the basic values and assumptions underlying the special education system as we know it. While this is difficult, it is as necessary as the previous evolutionary changes. The change which is coming can be either an albatross or an opportunity for individual special educators. It can either burden us more or free us from some of our unnecessary strictures. Whichever is the case. the change is coming, and in my view the regular education initiative is but one of many indications of the type ofeducational reform which. will lead us into the 21st century in American public education. I sincerely hope that many current “special educators” will be leaders in the empowerment phase of educational reform, and will be willing and eager participants in the redefinition of the services we provide to students. Implicit in this is the hope that many special educators will, in several years if not sooner, consider themselves to be committed and contributing members of the general education community.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century (1986). New York: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.

Bickel

W. E.

, & Bickel

D. D.

(1986). Effective schools, classrooms, and instruction: Implications for special education. Exceptional Children, 52, 489–500.

Carlberg

, & Kavale

(1980). The efficacy of special versus regular class placement for exceptional children: A meta analysis. Journal of Special Education, 14, 295–309.

Dunn

L. M.

(1968). Special education for the mildly retarded—Is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35, 5–22.

Gartner

, & Lipsky

D. K.

(1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367–395.

Gelheizer

L. M.

(1987). Reducing the number of students identified as learning disabled: A question of practice, philosophy, or policy? Exceptional Children, 54, 145–150.

Hagerty

G. J.

, & Abramson

(1987). Impediments to implementing national policy change for mildly handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 53, 315–323.

Kuhn

T. S.

(ed.) (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lieberman

L. M.

(1985). Special education and regular education: A merger made in heaven? Exceptional Children, 51, 513–516.

10.

Lilly

M. S.

(1986). The relationship between general and special education: A new face on an old issue. Counterpoint, 6(1), 10.

11.

Lilly

M. S.

, & Smith

(1980). Special education as a social movement. Education Unlimited, 2(3), 7–11.

12.

Lipsky

D. K.

, & Gartner

(1987). Capable of achievement and worthy of respect: Education for the handicapped as if they were full-fledged human beings. Exceptional Children, 54, 61.

13.

Reynolds

M. C.

, Wang

M. C.

, & Walberg

H. J.

(1987). The necessary restructuring of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 53, 391–398.

14.

Romanish

(1987). A skeptical view of educational reform. Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3), 9–12.

15.

Sapon-Shevin

(1987). The national education reports and special education: Implications for students. Exceptional Children, 53, 300–306.

16.

Shepard

L. A.

(1987). The new push for excellence: Widening the schism between regular and special education. Exceptional Children, 53, 327–329.

17.

Stainback

, & Stainback

(1984). A rationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51, 102–111.

18.

Tucker

, & Mandel

(1986). The Carnegie Report: A call for redesigning the schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(1), 24–27.

19.

Wang

M. C.

, & Reynolds

M. C.

(1985). Avoiding the “Catch 22” in special education reform. Exceptional Children, 51, 497–502.

20.

Weintraub

F. J.

(1986). Maybe we don't need dragons any more. Counterpoint, 6(1), 10–11.

21.

Will

M. C.

(1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52, 411–415.

22.

Ysseldyke

, Algozzine

, & Epps

(1983). A logical and empirical analysis of current practice in classifying students as handicapped. Exceptional Children, 50, 160–166.

23.

Ysseldyke

J. E.

, Algozzine

, Shinn

, & McGue

(1982). Similarities and differences between low achievers and students classified learning disabled. Journal of Special Education, 16, 73–85.

24.

Ysseldyke

J. E.

, & Thurlow

M. L.

(1984). Assessment practices in special education: Adequacy and appropriateness. Educational Psychologist, 9, 123–136.