The Erosion of FAPE for Students with LD

How schoolsfulfill Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) requirements has evolved. Decades of general and special education reforms have led to dramatic increases in expectations for students in special education to be included in the general education classroom and curriculum and to achieve to the same high standards as their general education peers. Students with learning disabilities (LD) in particular are impacted by these reforms. The notion of their individually‐appropriate education has been slowly eroded as limitations in special education practices and the goals of education reform have been responded to. As special education intentions and practices advance, stakeholders have a responsibility to protect the FAPE of students with LD, to ensure meeting these students’ individualized learning needs.     

Common Core State Standards,Writing, and Students with LD: Recommendations

This article examines the Common Core State Standards as they apply to writing and students with learning disabilities (LD). We first consider why the implementation of these standards is advantageous to writing instruction for students with LD as well as the challenges in implementing them. Next, we make the following four recommendations in terms of their implementation: (1) increase general and special education teachers’ knowledge about writing development; (2) create a writing environment in which students with LD can thrive; (3) employ evidence‐based writing practices in general education classes (where most students with LD are taught); and (4) use evidence‐based writing practices effective with students with LD. We conclude by considering research that still needs to be undertaken to help educators maximize the probability that students with and without LD meet the writing benchmarks proposed in these Standards.     

Educational Programs for Elementary Students with Learning Disabilities: Can They Be Both Effective and Inclusive?

One of the most controversial issues in special education over the last 40 years has been the extent to which students with learning disabilities (LD) should be educated in general education classrooms. Recent mandates in federal law requiring that all students with disabilities have access to the general education curriculum and make adequate yearly progress relative to this content have intensified this debate. In this article, a brief summary of research regarding the nature of instruction that produces significantly improved educational outcomes for students with LD is provided. This is followed by a review of research related to the delivery of this high‐quality instruction in inclusive, general education classrooms and in resource settings. We conclude that this research provides the foundation for reconsidering full inclusion and how services are delivered for elementary students with LD.     

Interrupting the discourse: a response to Reid and Valle

Reid and Valle (in this issue) illustrate how discourse within the field of learning disabilities (LD) determines what can and cannot be said and shapes what counts as knowledge or truth. Because basic assumptions about disability often remain unquestioned, Reid and Valle ask us to focus on the epistemological foundations of the field of LD. They demonstrate how discourse, far from being simply an academic or abstract theoretical pursuit, has direct material consequences for people labeled as having LD. In this response, I highlight some of the ways that the discourse in the LD field is getting in the way of truly transforming education for all learners and impeding our ability to ask the hard questions about our own complicity in issues such as the overrepresentation of students of color and the inaccessibility of general education learning environments.     

Including students with disabilities in national academic assessments in Korea

In Korea, the effort to include students with disabilities in the educational accountability system has just begun. This paper reviews how Korean students with disabilities have been tested using the National Assessment of Educational Achievement (NAEA) and what issues have emerged as a result of the testing. Analysis of the 2009 and 2010 NAEA data reveals that only a small proportion of students with disabilities participated in these tests and that those who did participate showed low academic achievement compared with general education students. In addition, even though alternate assessments are conducted by special education teachers to assess the academic performance of students with disabilities, national academic assessments in Korea do not include a system for alternate assessment. Based on findings of the analysis, several suggestions are made for improvement in Korea??s educational accountability system for students with disabilities.     

Is Inclusion an Illusion? An Examination of National and State Trends Toward the Education of Students with Learning Disabilities in General Education Classrooms

The inclusion of students with learning disabilities (LD) remains one of the more controversial issues in special education. Although research evidence seems to reveal that students with LD should spend most of the school day in the general education classroom, little data are available regarding the extent to which states are moving toward educating these students in less restrictive settings. This investigation was conducted to examine national and state data related to changes that occurred during the 1990s in educating students with LD in less restrictive settings. The results revealed that little change occurred across the United States as a whole, and that only 15 states moved toward educating students with LD in less restrictive settings during this time. The findings of this investigation further revealed that much of the apparent movement toward educating students with LD in general education classrooms is largely an illusion, explained primarily by the increasing identification rate for students with LD. The implications of these findings for future research and practice are discussed.     

Profiles of Asian American students with LD at initial referral, assessment, and placement in special education

Alhough Asian American students are underrepresented in special education, recent studies have highlighted concerns about the cultural and linguistic appropriateness of the identification and placement process. This study examined the characteristics of Asian American elementary students with learning disabilities (LD) in a school district in the Southwest that was selected because it served the largest number of Asian American students with LD in the state. Due to the small numbers of students served, the sample included all Asian American students with LD in Grades K to 5 (N = 26). Variables of interest included students' demographic characteristics, factors associated with referral, assessment practices and student profiles, and instructional recommendations for special education services. The results suggest that the experiences of Asian American students with LD are similar to those of Mexican American students with LD reported in earlier studies. These findings also reflect the challenges faced by educators in providing appropriate educational services for language minority students.     

Learning disabilities in New Zealand: where kiwis and kids with LD can't fly.

Learning disabilities (LD) has never been officially recognized as a category of special education in New Zealand. This article discusses the main reasons for the rejection of the LD category. The education system in New Zealand is described, and the nature of special education is outlined to provide a context for considering LD. Attempts by the parent group SPELD (New Zealand Federation of Specific Learning Disabilities Associations) to have "specific learning disabilities" (SLD) recognized in legislation are discussed, along with reasons for the rejection of these attempts by state education officials. It is concluded that LD/SLD will never be recognized as such in New Zealand. The needs of students with LD may potentially be met by new policies for "high incidence" special needs. But teachers' lack of skills and strategies for working with a range of learning difficulties is seen as an impediment to students with LD being adequately helped in the foreseeable future.     

Are we exacerbating students’ learning disabilities? An investigation of preservice teachers’ attributions of the educational outcomes of students with learning disabilities

While claims of the importance of attribution theory and teachers’ expectations of students for student performance are repeatedly made, there is little comprehensive research identifying the perceptions preservice teachers have of students with learning disabilities (LD). Accordingly, 444 Australian preservice primary school teachers were surveyed using vignettes and Likert-scale questions, to ascertain their responses to students with and without LD. It was found that preservice primary school general education teachers held a negative attribution style towards students with LD. Preservice primary teachers perceived students with LD as a lacking ability in comparison to others in the class. Recommendations for research and training programmes conclude the paper.     

English language learners, LD, and overrepresentation: A multiple-level analysis

Continuing unresolved problems in the field of special education include the continued use of discrepancy models; the need for better identification models; continued debate over programmatic issues, ranging from inclusion to self-contained models; and the continued overrepresentation of certain ethnic and racial groups in the learning disabilities (LD) category. This article focuses on students with mild learning disorders in general, and LD in particular, providing a perspective on how this problem has been addressed and suggesting a multilevel approach in which local context plays a central role. We suggest that overrepresentation is best conceptualized as an indicator of underlying issues rather than as the proper focal point of remediation efforts.     

Elevating Instruction for Secondary‐School Students with Learning Disabilities by Demystifying the Highly Qualified Subject Matter Requirement

The highly qualified mandate of the No Child Left Behind Act and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has created unnecessary confusion, particularly among secondary‐school special educators and administrators with respect to instruction in core academic subjects. The pursuit of compliance solutions to meet this requirement has generally distracted stakeholders from re‐examining the mission of secondary‐school special education for students with learning disabilities (LD). Because effective subject matter instruction within inclusive classrooms is dependent upon general and special educators capitalizing on each other's areas of expertise, the necessity of requiring special educators to possess a comparable level of subject matter knowledge as the general educator is not only of questionable merit, but often counterproductive. This article poses and examines several fundamental philosophical questions related to the delivery of core academic subject matter to students with LD.     

A follow-up study of recent special education graduates of learning disabilities programs

This study investigated the postschool vocational and community adjustment of recent special education graduates from a southwestern metropolitan school district. Sixty-four students with learning disabilities (LD) who had attended self-contained classes at 12 high schools were randomly selected. A questionnaire, administered either via the telephone or in person, was the source of data. Thirty-eight of the LD sample were in competitive employment. In general, the LD students received very few community services. For the most part, they received no agency support after graduation. Most of the LD subjects lived with parents or other relatives and most had a driver's license and car. Implications for postsecondary services and future research are discussed.     

The Old Man and the Sea: Navigating the Gulf between Special Educators and the Content Area Classroom

The special educator in the content area classroom often experiences an ill‐defined role, which can translate into marginalization within instructional settings. Indeed, most students with learning disabilities (LD) receive content area instruction from a general education teacher with the support of a special educator. However, the literacy demands of the respective content areas often present content specific challenges for students with language‐based disabilities and their teachers. To date, proposed content area literacy interventions have not addressed the specific language‐based needs of students with LD. In this article, we highlight the similarities among history, science, English language arts, and mathematics texts from a language perspective, and present strategies specifically targeting students’ background knowledge. We also provide recommendations to researchers and practitioners for improving content area learning.     

Comparative outcomes of two instructional models for students with learning disabilities: inclusion with co‐teaching and solo‐taught special education

We compared two instructional models (co‐teaching inclusion and solo‐taught special education) for students with learning disabilities (LD) with regard to their effect on academic achievement and class attendance. Twelve inclusive classes (experimental group) and 13 special education classes (control group) participated in the study. In grade 1, there were eight inclusive classes and nine special education classes with a total of 353 students (195 without disabilities, 58 with LD in inclusion and 100 with LD in special education classes). The data were collected from academic tests. Although our results revealed no significant difference between the two models in terms of target population, objectives and assigned resources, significant differences were observed in the effects on student outcomes in reading/writing and on attendance, as the inclusion model was shown to be globally more effective compared with the special education setting.     

Helping students with LD to succeed: the role of teachers’ hope,sense of coherence and specific self-efficacy

Teachers play a critical role in facilitating the academic achievements of students with learning disabilities (LD). The personal resources of teachers, such as sense of coherence (SOC) and hopeful thinking, may predict self-perception of the competency and efficacy they possess to help students with LD acquire needed learning skills. Several studies have shown the importance of SOC and hope to the success of students with LD, but research has not focused on how the hope of their teachers may help these students succeed in inclusive classrooms. The goal of the current study was to identify profiles of teachers, based on their personal resources of SOC and hope, and to examine their self-efficacy (SE) in helping students with LD acquire learning skills. The sample consisted of 624 teachers (567 females and 57 males) from inclusive classes; 143 teachers in this sample had special education training. Using cluster analysis four distinct clusters were identified suggesting that both SOC, as a global personality measure, and hope, as a measure of future expectations, contributed to the SE of teachers: their belief in their ability to help the students with LD acquire learning skills. In each cluster, teachers with special education training had higher levels of hope and SE. The results highlight the important role of teachers’ personal resources in predicting their belief in their professional ability to help students with LD.     

Attitudes of special education teachers towards using technology in inclusive classrooms: a mixed‐methods study

The purpose of this mixed‐methods study was to explore special education teachers’ attitudes towards using technology in inclusive classrooms in Oman. The sample consisted of 428 special education teachers working in Omani public schools (250 teachers of students with learning disabilities (LD), 90 teachers of students with intellectual disability and 88 teachers of students with hearing impairment). Participants responded to the attitudes towards computers questionnaire. For the qualitative section of this study, three semi‐structured group interviews were conducted with a group of special education teachers: 15 teachers of students with hearing impairment, 15 teachers of students with intellectual disabilities and 15 teachers of students with LD). Also, the teachers responded to a survey of educational technology which encompassed seven questions about computer technology. Results of the study indicated that the special education teachers’ attitudes towards using computers were generally positive. The most notable positive attitudes were in the following subscales: special education considerations, staff development considerations, computers use in society, and computers and quality of instruction issues. The analysis of variance results showed that experience and type of disability did not have a significant effect on teachers’ attitudes towards technology.     

Large-scale academic achievement testing of deaf and hard-of-hearing students: past, present, and future

The first large-scale, nationwide academic achievement testing program using Stanford Achievement Test (Stanford) for deaf and hard-of-hearing children in the United States started in 1969. Over the past three decades, the Stanford has served as a benchmark in the field of deaf education for assessing student academic achievement. However, the validity and reliability of using the Stanford for this special student population still require extensive scrutiny. Recent shifts in educational policy environment, which require that schools enable all children to achieve proficiency through accountability testing, warrants a close examination of the adequacy and relevance of the current large-scale testing of deaf and hard-of-hearing students. This study has three objectives: (a) it will summarize the historical data over the last three decades to indicate trends in academic achievement for this special population, (b) it will analyze the current federal laws and regulations related to educational testing and special education, thereby identifying gaps between policy and practice in the field, especially identifying the limitations of current testing programs in assessing what deaf and hard-of-hearing students know, and (c) it will offer some insights and suggestions for future testing programs for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.     

Breaking containment – the power of narrative knowing: countering silences within traditional special education research

Special education has been critiqued for not adequately acknowledging and therefore addressing the overrepresentation of students of colour assigned disability labels. To counter the paucity of information about the largest group of disabled students in urban settings, eight young adults labelled learning disabled (LD) co‐created ‘portraits in progress’. These social, cultural, and historical based narratives act as counter stories to traditional special education research located within a medical‐model paradigm that casts students as deficit‐based. Excerpts from these highly personal narratives reveal nuanced understandings of power dynamics pertaining to disability, race, and social class as each one shapes the experience of the others. Participants perceive their lives as a series of interlocking containments; for some, special education is one example.     

Learning Disabilities and the LRE Mandate: An Examination of National and State Trends

This study was conducted to examine changes in the identification rates and national and state placement practices for school age students with learning disabilities (LD) between 1990–1991 and 2008–2009. Findings revealed that while identification rates of students with LD declined by about 4 percent during this time, general education placements increased over 166 percent, pullout placements declined by more than 50 percent, while students educated in highly restrictive separate class and separate school settings declined by approximately 60 percent. Unlike earlier studies, most states made at least some progress toward educating students with LD in less restrictive settings. Much of the change in placement practices for students with LD occurred since 2000.