Increasing Regulatory Flexibility of Special Education Programs: Problems and Promising Strategies

Abstract

This study investigated the perceptions of federal, state, and local program administrators related to increasing regulatory flexibility. Open-ended interviews were conducted with 58 individuals representing 8 states, 11 local school districts, the U.S. Department of Education, and selected national organizations. Individuals were asked to respond to a number of questions regarding how their state or local district is attempting to increase flexibility in implementing the Indiviual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Title I of the Improving America's Schools Act (IASA), and bilingual education and to identify barriers to increasing the consolidation of resources across these programs. Strategies for consolidating programs and services were also identified. Interviewees generally perceived a number of benefits in consolidation, including more efficient use of resources, enhanced collaboration, and more inclusive education. They also identified a number of policy and organizational barriers including fear of audits, lack of leadership, and lack of personnel training or support. Challenges included the dilution of services, lack of targeting, and loss of special protections to special populations.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allington

McGill-Franzen

(1989). School response to reading failure: Instruction for Chapter 1 and special education students in grades two, four and eight. Elementary School Journal, 89, 529–542.

Anderson

L. W.

Pelicer

L. P.

(1990). Synthesis of research on compensatory and remedial education. Educational Leadership, 48(1), 10–16.

Goals 2000; Educate America Act, Pub. L. No. 103-227, Sect. 20 (1994).

Goodlad

J. I.

Lovitt

T. C.

(Eds.). (1993). Integrating general and special education. New York: Maxwell Macmillan International.*

Harry

(1995). The overrepresentation of minority students in special education: Theories and recommendations. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.*

The Improving America's Schools Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-382, § 6301, 108 Stat. 3518 (1994).

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-17, § 1400, 37 Stat. 111 (1997).

Kimbrough

Hill

(1983). Problems of implementing multiple categorical education programs. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 246 528)*

Levin

H. M.

(1982). Federal grants and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 52(4), 444–459.

10.

McLaughlin

M. J.

Warren

S. H.

(1992). Issues and options: School restructuring and students with disabilities. College Park, MD: Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children.*

11.

Meyers

Gelzheiser

Yelich

Gallagher

(1990). Classroom, remedial, and resource teachers' views of pullout programs. Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 533–545.

12.

Moore

M. T.

Walker

L. J.

Holland

R. P.

(1982). Fine tuning special education finance: A guide for state policymakers. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.*

13.

Reynolds

M. C.

Wang

M. C.

Walberg

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

14.

Sailor

Gee

Karasoff

(1993). Full inclusion and school restructuring. In Snell

(Ed.) Instructing students with severe disabilities. (pp. 1–30). New York: Merrill.*

15.

School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-239, § 6101, 108 Stat. 568 (1994).

16.

Skrtic

T. M.

(1991). Behind special education: A critical analysis of professional knowledge and school organization. Denver, CO: Love.*

17.

Smith

M. S.

O'Day

(1991a). Systemic school reform. In Fuhrman

S. H.

Malen

(Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233–268). New York: Falmer.*

18.

Smith

M. S.

O'Day

(1991b). Educational equality: 1966 and now. In Verstegen

D. A.

Ward

J. G.

(Eds.), Spheres of justice in education. New York: HarperBusiness.*

19.

Snell

M. E.

(1991). Schools are for all kids: The importance of integration for students with severe disabilities and their peers. In Lloyd

J. W.

Repp

A. C.

Singh

N. N.

(Eds.), The Regular Education Initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 133–148). Sycamore, IL: Sycamore.*

20.

Stainback

(1985). Integration of students with severe handicaps in regular schools. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.

21.

Thousand

J. S.

Villa

R. A.

(1990). Strategies for educating learners with severe disabilities within their local home schools and communities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 23, 1–24.

22.

Tsang

Levin

H. M.

(1983). The impact of intergovernmental grants on educational expenditures. Review of Educational Research, 53(3), 329–369.

23.

U.S. General Accounting Office. (1982). Lessons learned from past block grants: Implications for Congressional oversight (GAO/IPE-82-8). Washington, DC: Author.

24.

U.S. General Accounting Office. (1995). Block grants (GAO/HEHS-95-42). Washington, DC: Author.

25.

Verstegen

D. A.

(1996). Integrating services and resources for children under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: Federal perspectives and issues. Journal of Education Finance, 21, 477–505.

26.

Will

(1986). Educating students with learning problems—A shared responsibility: A report to the Secretary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.