In this brief response to Agran et al., I provide data on the extent to which students with the most significant cognitive disabilities (i.e., those students participating in alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards) are separated educationally from their peers without disabilities. I further discuss additional factors that may be contributing to separate placements for students with the most significant disabilities. Finally, I provide some promising resources that may help to address these persistent issues.
AgranM.JacksonL.KurthJ. A.RyndakD.BurnetteK.JamesonM.ZagonaA.FitzpatrickH.WehmeyerM. (2020). Why aren’t students with severe disabilities being placed in general education classrooms: Examining the relations among classroom placement, learner outcomes, and other factors. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45, 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919878134
2.
BrockM. (2018). Trends in the educational placement of students with intellectual disability in the United States over the past 40 years. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 123(4), 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-123.4.305
3.
BrownL. (1991). Who are they and what do they want? In MeyerL. H.PeckC. A.BrownL. (Eds.), Critical issues in the lives of people with severe disabilities. Paul Brookes.
4.
CametoR.BerglandF.KnokeyA.-M.NagleK. M.SanfordC.KalbS. C.BlackorbyJ.SinclairB.RileyD. L.OretegaM. (2010, April). Teacher perspectives of school-level implementation of alternate assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities (NCSER 2010-3007). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509386.pdf
5.
CarterE. (2019). Inclusion, friendship, and the power of peers. IMPACT: Feature Issue on Inclusive Education for K- Students with the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities, 31(2), 19–20. https://ici.umn.edu/products/impact/312/Peer-Power/#Peer-Power
6.
KearnsJ.Towles-ReevesE.KleinertH.KleinertJ.ThomasM. (2011). Characteristics of and implications for students participating in alternate assessment based on alternate academic achievement standards. Journal of Special Education, 45(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466909344223
KleinertH.Towles-ReevesE.QuenemoenR.ThurlowM.FlueggeL.WesemanL.KerbelA. (2015). Where students with the most significant cognitive disabilities are taught: Implications for general curriculum access. Exceptional Children, 81, 312–329.
KurthJ. A.MorningstarM. E.KozleskiE. (2014). The persistence of highly restrictive special education placements for students with low-incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(3), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796914555580
11.
MorningstarM. E.KurthJ. A.JohnsonP. J. (2017). Examining national trends in educational placements for students with significant disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 38(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516678327
ThompsonJ. R.WalkerV. L.ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L. (2018). Expanding inclusive educational opportunities for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities through personalized supports. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 56(6), 396–411. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-56.6.396
Towles-ReevesE.KearnsJ.KleinertH.KleinertJ. (2009). An analysis of the learning characteristics of students taking alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards. Journal of Special Education, 42(4), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022466907313451
17.
U.S. Department of Education. (2018, December). 40th annual report to Congress on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
