The Journal of Special Education

In this article, the ways in which special education for students with learning disabilities was perceived as “special” historically and what we know about effective special education instructional practices for students with learning disabilities currently are summarized. The influence of monitoring progress, providing explicit and systematic instruction, understanding the critical factors associated with progress in academic areas such as reading and math, and teaching students in small groups with many opportunities to practice and obtain feedback are essential features of special education for students with learning disabilities. A model for providing integrated services between general and special education for students with learning disabilities is described.

Although students with emotional or behavioral disorders have historically experienced poor school outcomes compared to other students with and without disabilities, a number of effective practices are available that can make special education for students with emotional or behavioral disorders special. Within the three broad intervention areas of inappropriate behavior, academic learning problems, and interpersonal relationships, we provide a brief overview of a number of empirically validated practices. We argue that teaching students with emotional or behavioral disorders demands unique interventions that are beyond that typically available or necessary in general education. We conclude that special education is special for students with emotional or behavioral disorders and that it can be even more special with greater efforts at implementing research-based practices early, with integrity, and sustaining these interventions over the course of students' school careers.

To define what is special about the education of students with severe disabilities, this article provides a snapshot of research-based practices that are relevant to the “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) focus on accountability. The NCLB requirement to assess all students in reading, math, and science is contrasted to the functional approach typical of skill acquisition research for this population. The concept of adequate yearly progress is addressed by reviewing the types of instructional strategies that would most likely yield progress. Information is also provided on the extent to which teachers use research-based strategies. We conclude that prior research provides guidance for how to select and teach skills even though new applications for academics are needed.

Over the last decade, the field of early intervention/early childhood special education (EI/ECSE) has emerged as a primary service for infants and preschool children with disabilities and their families. Systems for providing early intervention for infants and toddlers exist in every state, and all state Departments of Education are responsible for special education for preschool children. In EI/ECSE, a unified theory of practice has emerged and draws from a range of psychological and educational theories. A strong, evidence-based set of practices that service providers and caregivers use to promote the development and well-being of infants and young children with disabilities and their families underlies this theory of practice. The purpose of this article is to describe the tenets of this theory and identify evidence-based practices associated with each.

In response to information regarding students' postschool outcomes, the past 15 years have reflected an increased focus on improving transition education and services for youth with disabilities. Three specific initiatives characterize this development: (a) federal special education and disability legislation; (b) federal, state, and local investment in transition services development; and (c) effective transition practices research. Outcomes of these initiatives include (a) an expanded perspective concerning transition education and services and (b) identification of practices that apply this perspective to individual student needs. The authors describe effective transition practices in five areas: student-focused planning, student development, interagency collaboration, family involvement, and program structures. Developing specific interventions and service arrays for individual students within each of the transition practice areas is essential for postschool success.

Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is an approach for assessing the growth of students in basic skills that originated uniquely in special education. A substantial research literature has developed to demonstrate that CBM can be used effectively to gather student performance data to support a wide range of educational decisions. Those decisions include screening to identify, evaluating prereferral interventions, determining eligibility for and placement in remedial and special education programs, formatively evaluating instruction, and evaluating reintegration and inclusion of students in mainstream programs. Beyond those fundamental uses of CBM, recent research has been conducted on using CBM to predict success in high-stakes assessment, to measure growth in content areas in secondary school programs, and to assess growth in early childhood programs. In this article, best practices in CBM are described and empirical support for those practices is identified. Illustrations of the successful uses of CBM to improve educational decision making are provided.

The question of where special education students should be educated is not new. In this article, the author reviews research studies and research reviews that address this question. She argues that research evidence on the relative efficacy of one special education placement over another is scarce, methodologically flawed, and inconclusive. She also states that “Where should students with disabilities be educated?” is the wrong question to ask, that it is antithetical to the kind of individualized planning that should be embodied in decision making for and with students with disabilities, and that it fails to specify where, for what, and for whom. The author calls for new ways of thinking about the problem and of conducting research so that progress can be made on improving results for students with disabilities.

In this topical issue of The Journal of Special Education, leading scholars in special education reviewed the literature and investigated whether special education is, indeed, special by examining to what degree (a) effective techniques have been developed for students with disabilities, (b) these effective techniques are applied and implemented with fidelity, and (c) utilization of these techniques is unique to special education. In this article, the authors analyze findings from this special issue regarding what is special—effective, implemented, and unique—about special education. The authors found that effective, empirically supported practices have been developed for students with disabilities, that these techniques are used predominantly in special education, and that these effective practices are not implemented regularly or with fidelity. Recommendations to enhance the implementation of effective, research-based practices are offered.