Behavioral Disorders

Children with autism and other disabilities are often prohibited from participating in inclusive educational environments due to the occurrence of problem behaviors. In this study, a standardized model for individualizing procedures of behavior support, Prevent–Teach–Reinforce (PTR), was evaluated in general education settings with three elementary school students with autism spectrum disorders and serious problem behaviors. A multiple baseline across students design was used to test the effects of PTR on the occurrence of problem behaviors and academic engagement. Results indicated that problem behaviors were reduced and engagement was increased for all of the participants. The findings are discussed in relation to the importance and the challenges of implementation fidelity and effective behavior support in general education settings.

Lack of progress of children with emotional disturbance (ED) has begun to be documented in longitudinal school-based studies. Variability in these studies may be due to several factors, including widespread differences in academic, behavioral, and social functioning of these children, their special education status, and school contextual factors. In this study, 86 children were followed over a two-year period: children were drawn from three subgroups—children with ED receiving special education in low-income schools, children with ED receiving special education services in high-income schools, and children not receiving special education services but who were considered high risk for ED. Outcome measures included reading and math achievement along with ratings of behavioral progress. Despite initial differences in overall functioning, there was, almost without exception, no significant progress in any of the three subgroups over the course of a full academic year. This lack of progress was not related to the type of special education and related services that students received in self-contained or full inclusion programs. Results and implications are discussed regarding lack of response of children with or at risk for ED to intervention in both general and special education.

Significant issues still confront the field of emotional or behavioral disorders (E/BD) in providing a free, appropriate, public educational (FAPE) program for these students. This paper reviews recent case law for several critical areas of concern to the field today, including: (a) response to intervention (RTI) and child find procedures, (b) required mental health services, and (c) the controversial use of restraint to manage aggressive behaviors.

Investigations of why students with emotional disturbance (ED) are underidentified in special education have often focused on economic factors and problems with the definition of ED. The present study focuses on variation in underidentification across states and its relationship to political ideology. State-level political, economic, and demographic data were obtained from multiple sources, including the National Election Pool exit polls (2008), the U.S. Census Bureau (2010), the National Center for Educational Statistics (2010), the U.S. Department of Education/Office of Special Education Programs (2009), and the National Center for Children in Poverty (2009). The authors conducted a series of regression analyses in which per pupil expenditure, per capita income, percentage child poverty, ethnicity, and conservatism were used to explain state rates of ED identification and state rates of intellectual disability (ID) identification. The resulting model for the identification of ED explained more than 50% of the variance, with conservatism being the strongest predictor (β = -.72, p < .001), whereas per pupil expenditure was nonsignificant. States with higher levels of conservatism had distinctly lower ED identification rates. Conservatism was not a significant factor in state identification of ID. The influence of state political leaning on ED identification and special education for children and youth with ED is discussed.