Secondary Programs in Special Education: Are Many of Them Justifiable?

Abstract

This article discusses the apparent link between secondary special education programs for mildly handicapped students and the eventual post-high-school adjustment of these students. The current national emphasis on transition to the community, and especially to work, has resulted in the close scrutiny of the outcomes of special education. Large numbers of mildly handicapped students are dropping out of school programs and both graduates and dropouts earn very low salaries. The author suggests a radical change in secondary programs for mildly handicapped students, away from academics and toward functional, vocational programs.

Labeling Preschoolers as Learning Disabled: A Cautionary Position

“…Further, debate concerning the general efficacy of school-based special education for students with mild disabilities persists (Dunn, 1968;Edgar, 1987: Reynolds et al, 1987Stainback & Stainback, 1984;Wang & Walberg, 1988), and it will continue whether or not significant improvements are made in methodologies utilized to study efficacy. We should not stop providing special services to those in need simply because we are not sure how effective those services are, just as we should not deny special services to very young children in need because we are justifiably hesitant to label them as disabled.…”

“…In addition, Kirk and Chalfant (1984) postulated that learning disabilities are developmental in nature. However, extensive data from follow-up studies of special education graduates with learning disabilities indicate that this disability is not strictly an academic condition unrelated to adult adjustment (Edgar, 1987;Haring, Lovett, &c Smith, 1990;Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985;Mithaug, Horiuchi, & Fanning, 1985). Unfortunately, longitudinal studies exploring later adult adjustment are not available yet.…”

Early Intervention and Secondary/Transition Services: Harbingers of Change in Education

“…These imperatives emerged in response to abundant evidence that existing educational services for adolescents and young adults were ineffective in producing desired employment and community participation outcomes Edgar, 1987;Kiernan & Ciborowski, 1986;Wehman, 1992).…”

Middle school teachers perspectives on inclusion: a qualitative study

“…The intent of this law was to ensure that all children, disabled or not, had access to a free and appropriate public education. However, dissatisfaction arose with the educational as well as social outcomes of exceptional, or special education students, who had been receiving these newly guaranteed services (Carlberg & Kavale, 1980;Edgar, 1987;Kavale & Glass, 1982; Texas Education Agency, 1991). A reexamination of the dual delivery system of general and special education was provoked by the Regular Education Initiative (REI), a reform proposed by Reynolds and Wang (1983).…”

“…The lack of a practical definition of mainstreaming confounded contemporary reform efforts, just as defining LRE in practical terms continues to plague educators in the 1990's as they attempt to include special education into the framework of current school-wide reform efforts. & Others, 1988;Carlberg & Kavale, 1980;Edgar, 1987;Glass, 1983;Hagerty & Abramson, 1987;Kavale & Glass, 1982;Reynolds & Wang, 1983, Ysseldyke, Thurlow, Christenson & Weiss, 1987 began to question the efficacy of segregated special education services that were developed in response to PL 94-142. Negative student outcomes on measures of academic achievement, student self-esteem and in post-high school employment opportunities were used as the basis for a call for a more extensive restructuring of special education.…”