Effectiveness of special class placement for children labeled neurologically handicapped

Bersoff, Donald N.; Kabler, Michael L.; Fiscus, Edward; Ankney, Robert

doi:10.1016/0022-4405(72)90045-3

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data pertinent to the academic and social success of the CP children in this study tend to support the conclusion of other researchers (Hammill, 1971;Bersoff, Kabler, Fiscus & Ankney, 1972;Cruickshank, 1974;Watts etal., 1978) that decisions made solely on the basis of aetiology are largely irrelevant to the educational needs of the exceptional child. Although, as a group, CP children were found to perform less efficiently than their normal peers, substantial individual successes underscore the fact that, in educational terms, these children cannot be regarded as a homogeneous group, distinguished primarily by the presence of a neurological handicap.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Integration of Mildly Handicapped Cerebral Palsied Children into Regular Schools

Ward

1984

The Exceptional Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Integration of Mildly Handicapped Cerebral Palsied Children into Regular Schools

Ward

1984

The Exceptional Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There appears to be little conclusive empirical evidence concerning the effects of placement on the achievement of children defined as LD. Bersoff, Kabler, Fiscus, and Ankney (1972) were concerned with placement effects on children labeled LD due to neurological impairment or minimal brain dysfunction. Comparisons were made of the self-contained versus regular class model.…”

Section: Academic Achievement Of Other Handicapped Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mainstreaming: Perspectives on Educating Handicapped Children in the Public School

Semmel¹,

Gottlieb²,

Robinson³

1979

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The most common approach to differential treatment has been to segregate special education children by label. The Gutkin,Director,School Psychology Training Program,University of Nebraska,130 Bancroft Hall,Lincoln,Nebraska 68588. efficacy of such placements has not been well supported by research and has recently come under severe attack (Bersoff, Kabler, Fiscus, & Ankney, 1972;Christoplos & Renz, 1969;Forness, 1972;Sabatino, 1972). Some techniques, such as operant conditioning, have been shown to be effective with special education students; however, these interventions have been guided in their program design by behavioral observations rather than by diagnostic labels (Kazdin & Craighead, 1973;O'Leary & O'Leary, 1977).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Funding patterns for exceptional children: Current approaches and suggested alternatives.

Gutkin¹,

Tieger²

1979

Professional Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presently, school personnel must formally label special needs children if the cost of services rendered to these children is to be reimbursed by governmental agencies. Research indicates that current diagnostic systems are characterized by limited reliability and questionable validity. There is considerable, although not conclusive, evidence indicating that the labeling process may be harmful to children. It is hypothesized that categorical funding strategies have also restricted school psychologists from delivering a full range of services to schools. An alternative approach is presented that includes (a) a move away from categorical labeling, (b) the distribution of special education funds to school districts on a lump-sum basis, and (c) the provision of reinforcers to appropriate school personnel for successful remedial interventions. The incorporation of these concepts into new funding laws should result in a higher quality of educational programming, fewer children who are unnecessarily stigmatized, and a more appropriate utilization of school psychological services.The manner in which special education funds are allocated within school systems is of central importance to school psychologists and the children they serve. Funding laws have had a major, although probably inadvertent, impact on several crucial parameters relating to the delivery of psychological services in schools and are therefore deserving of close scrutiny. A primary focus of this analysis concerns the efficacy of federal and state statutes that require children to be categorized and labeled (e.g., emotionally disturbed, learning disabled, etc.) before special education funds can be spent in their behalf. Current StatusCurrently, laws in virtually every state (Massachusetts being the clearest exception) mandate psychological labeling as a prerequisite to service delivery if local school districts are to be reimbursed by the state for the cost of special services. Recent federal legislation, in particular Public Law 94-142, 1 has reinforced this arrangement. Needless to say, special services are expensive, and most local districts are therefore largely dependent on these external state and federal funds if they are to provide such services for their students.The advantages of current funding approaches are clear and were no doubt largely responsible for their original establishment. Local school districts benefit by receiving large sums of revenue that can be utilized to help meet the educational and psychological needs of their exceptional children. Labeling practices benefit state and federal governments by providing a structure of accountability so that funds earmarked for children 1

show abstract

Effectiveness of special class placement for children labeled neurologically handicapped

Cited by 16 publications

References 18 publications

Integration of Mildly Handicapped Cerebral Palsied Children into Regular Schools

Integration of Mildly Handicapped Cerebral Palsied Children into Regular Schools

Mainstreaming: Perspectives on Educating Handicapped Children in the Public School

Funding patterns for exceptional children: Current approaches and suggested alternatives.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About