Many factors must be considered
before determining the educational placement of a student with a disability. However, Heumann and Hehir
(2004) identifies the relationship between Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
requirements to the IEP process as a key factor (IDEA, 2004). Under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the student’s IEP forms the basis for
the student’s placement decision. Through
the filter of federal law, policies, and procedures, the IEP must document,
evaluate, and consider the student’s present level of academic achievement and functional
performance (IDEA, 2004). Therefore, the
student’s present
level of academic achievement and functional performance is arguably the
greatest factor in determining a student’s educational placement.
The
least
restrictive environment (LRE) mandate is key requirement for educating
children with disabilities under IDEA (2004).
This mandate states:
To the
maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities…are educated with
children who are not disabled, and special classes, separate schooling, or other
removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment
occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such
that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and
services cannot be achieved satisfactorily [Sec 612(a)(5)(A)].
Interpretations
of the meaning of least restrictive environment vary in special education. These beliefs range from those that view the
regular education classroom in a student’s neighborhood school as always the least
restrictive environment (LRE) for all students, to those that advocate for a
full continuum of program placements (Crockett & Kauffman, 1999). Prior
to 2000, the overriding emphasis for determining the LRE for students with
special needs focused placement decisions on the “where” rather than the “how”
of the “instruction that should be taught” (Crockett & Kauffman, 1999, p.
1). It is now ethical and reasonable to accept
“the environment in which all the needs of a student are best met, where the
student acquires the greatest benefits from the educational program” (Curry
& Hatlen, 1988, p. 420) is the least restrictive and thereby most
appropriate environment.
The
most enabling placement is one in which the student has the opportunity to
fully participate in all aspects of the school experience including acquisition
of special skills, thereby providing an academic, social, and emotional
environment that encourages a holistic development in preparation for
life. The issue is the quality of
education provided within a particular placement as measured by the degree to
which specific, unique needs…can be met
(Hazekamp & Huebner,
1989, p. 1).
Explicating the
general approach for determining student placement, Riley
(2000) identifies how the IEP team of a student who is found eligible for
special education services, must first consider if the student can be provided
with an appropriate education in a regular education classroom with the
services already there. If not, then the
IEP team moves through increasingly more “restrictive” settings, whereby
subsequent consideration are on settings that become increasingly more
segregated from non-eligible peers. These
settings may range from the regular education classroom with supplementary aids
and service, to a slightly more segregated setting with the services embedded,
to a more segregated setting modified with supplementary aids and services.
Therefore,
the most appropriate educational environment for an individual student with a
disability must be based on the student’s needs as grounded in his or her present
level of academic achievement and functional performance, as determined through the
educational team’s instructional and assessment processes and then specified in
the IEP. Depending on the student’s
diverse strengths and areas for development, his or her need for instructional
access to the general education curriculum may require different educational
placements, for varying durations, and at different times during his or her
academic career. A continuum or cascade of
services (Deno, 1962; Reynolds, 1970) will be necessary to explore and
utilize services from a combination of programmatic options. The model is not the problem. Rather, too often the lack of collaborative
and deliberate consideration and respect for the student’s present level
of academic achievement and functional performance result in problematic
decisions that adversely affect the integrity of the placement process.
To
cite:
Anderson,
C.J. (March 3, 2013) Factors
determining the educational placement for a student
with a disability. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/
References
Council for Exceptional
Children (2003). What Every Special
Educator Must Know (5th ed.).
Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children
Crockett, J.B., &
Kauffmann, J.M. (1999) The least
restrictive environment: Its origins and
Interpretations in
special education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Curry, S.A., &
Hatlen, P.H. (1988). Meeting the unique educational needs of visually impaired
pupils
through appropriate placement. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 82, 417-424
Federal Register (2006). IDEA
2004 Regulations. Retrieved from:
Hazekamp, J., & Huebner, K.M. (Eds.). (1989). Program
planning and evaluation for blind and
visually impaired
students: National guidelines for educational excellence. New York, NY:
American Foundation
for the Blind.
Heumann, J.E. & Hehir
(2004). Letter to the council of chief State School Officers.
Retrieved on
December 10, 2008 from http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/lre.osers.memo.idea.htm
Holbrook, M.C., & Koenig, A.J. (2000). Basic techniques
for modifying instruction.
A.J. Koenig & M.C. Holbrook (Eds.) Foundations of education: Vol. 2 (2nd
Ed., pp. 173-195).
New York: AFB Press.
Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446.
Riley, R. (2000).
Educating blind and visually impaired students: Policy guidance from
OSERS.
Retrieved from http://www.ed/gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2000-2/060800a.html
