Article Review: Preparing General Education Teachers to Improve Outcomes for Students with Disabilities

Lee Ann Melchor
University of Central Florida
College of Education and Graduate Studies
Fall 2011

This publication by NCLD is a prime example of how teachers are continually working to improve student outcomes while working within state and federal frameworks and on limited resources.  The article reflects the amount of stress placed on teachers to meet annual yearly goals, improve test scores and ensure students are meeting the requirements under NCLB in order for the districts to receive federal funding. 

Teachers of exceptional students are under more pressure because exceptional students are required to achieve AYP at the same rate of their non-disabled peers, as well as being required to pass assessments at the same level as their non-disabled peers.  Not only must general education teachers ensure that this is achieved, but must be able to use reasonable accommodations and modifications to ensure students meet those goals. 

Many general education teachers have not been adequately trained to deal with the medical, physical, mental and other challenges of a special needs child.  There is a lot of stress on general education teachers to combine the special needs education into a general education setting, combining both disabled and non-disabled students, tailoring instructional strategies to meet each student’s individual needs, writing lesson plans, attending staff and parent meetings, administrative duties and other duties as required.  In addition, many programs and processes designed to assist students with special needs, such as the IEP process and RtI, require general education teachers to devote a large amount of time for data collection, research and documentation before the child can be referred for special education services.

With this, comes a huge burden for teachers.  Teachers must continually use their time and resources effectively to deliver the most effective level of instruction, in the most efficient manner possible.  Teachers need adequate training, professional and parental support and a strong knowledge of the resources and skills they have available.  Also, at the state, federal and district level, incentives must be provided for teachers to invest their time and energy into costly training programs to further their education and training.  It is one thing for state, federal and district requirements to be placed on teachers, but without adequate training and support, teachers simply will fail to meet expectations.

References:

Blanton, L., et al. (2011) Preparing General Education Teachers to Improve Outcomes for Students with Disabilities.  AACTE and NCLD Publication.  Retrieved from http://www.aacte.org/pdf/publications/reports_studies/aacte%20ncld%20policy%20brief%20may%202011.pdf

History of Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)

 Lee Ann Melchor

University of Central Florida

Department of Education and Graduate Studies

The first learning disability was diagnosed in 1877 by German neurologist Adolf Kussamaul after diagnosing a child with “word blindness”-- "a complete text blindness…although the power of sight, the intellect and the powers of speech are intact."  Another German physician diagnosed the first known case of dyslexia in 1887, while W.E. Bruner diagnosed the first child with reading difficulties in the U.S. in 1905.

Despite these early known reports of learning disabilities and the prior works of psychoanalysts Skinner, Chomisky, Vygotosky and many others, legislation changes in the realm of special education to address learning disabilities did not take place until approx. the 1960s.  In 1963, Samuel A. Kirk uses the term “learning disabled”, marking the first time this term had been used.  The term “learning disability” clearly departs from the mental disorders as classified by early psychoanalysts.

Learning disabilities today, as defined by the federal definition includes perceptual disabilities, brain injury, dyslexia, minimal brain dysfunction and developmental aphasia.  Learning disabilities does not include any disorder that is the primary result of a vision, hearing, motor disability, mental retardation, emotional disturbance, or environmental, cultural or economic disadvantage. (IDEA Amendments, 1997, Sec. 602(26), p.13)

Today, the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities has created an alternative definition due to dissatisfaction of the federal definition for learning disability.  This alternative definition developed by the NJCLD encompasses including adults, those with self-regulation and social interaction issues, disorders of the central nervous system and to clarify ambiguous term under inclusion, exclusion, spelling and references to the psychological processes. 

In 1965, Congress under Title VI created the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, now known as the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).  In 1969, Congress specifically addresses learning disabilities with the passing of the Children with Specific Learning Disabilities Act.  This was later included in the Education of the Handicapped Act of 1970 (PL 91-230).

The Civil Rights Movement of the late 1960s and 1970s marked a radical change in the perception of the disabled.  In 1973, Congress passed the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to very little public interest.  This act protects the disabled from discrimination due to their disability.  This was followed shortly by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) which protects the rights of families. FERPA specifically gives parents access to all information collected, maintained, or used by a school district regarding their child.

In 1970, Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142).  This law incorporated one of the major concepts still used today--free, appropriate public education for all students (FAPE). In 1990, this law was renamed as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and later reauthorized in 1997 and 2004.  IDEA changed the use of the word “handicap”, replacing it with “disability” therefore changing the public perceptions and increased sensitivity toward those affected by a disability.  Also in 1990, the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) Act was passed which mandates that no one with a disability can be restricted from any activity programs or activities that are federally funded because of their disability.  ADA also utilizes the 504 plan which spells out what accommodations the child will receive in order for students to have the opportunity to perform as their non-disabled peers. 

IDEA (1990) also added in Autism and traumatic brain injury into eligibility categories.  In 1997, general education teachers were included in the IEP process, allowed disabled students access to general education curriculum and also mandated that disabled students would be tested in state-wide assessments.  ADHD also was added to the eligibility categories in 1997.  In 2004, IDEA and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) work together to ensure that students are educated in the least restrictive environment possible and that a child’s disability does not exclude him from promoting forward. 

With the passing of federal legislation, more information readily known about most learning disabilities and changes in perceptions toward the disabled, there has been significant change in moving from institutionalization, to normalization, deinstitutionalization and inclusion.  This radical change in the perceptions and attitudes toward the disabled has been the direct result of parents, advocates, agencies, legislation and other individuals toward improving the quality of life and respect toward those affected by a disability.  This also includes supports and sensitivity to families affected by a loved one with a disability. 

While many causes of disabilities are not known, we have made great strides in improving the knowledge base of environmental, hereditary and other factors that cause some disabilities.  In addition, our focus has shifted toward ensuring that anyone affected by a disability is provided every opportunity to participate in education, employment and other activities as that of their non-disabled peers.  The biggest change by far, is the overall attitudes, levels of acceptance and perceptions about people with disabilities.

References:

Hallahan, D. (2012) Exceptional Learners. Pearson: Upper Saddle River.

LD Online (2011) Timeline of Learning Disabilities. 

Retrieved from http://www.ldonline.org/

Teaching LD (2011).  Retrieved from http://teachingld.org/pages/DLD-history