|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Access to the General Curriculum for Students with Disabilities: A Brief for Parents and Teachers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Access to the General Curriculum for Students with Disabilities: A Brief for Parents and Teachers
By Joanne Karger and Charles Hitchcock
Introduction
In 1997, Congress made a number of important changes to the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA). One of the most significant changes is the requirement that students
with disabilities receive access to the general curriculum. Under
the new law, students with disabilities must (1) have access to the
general curriculum; (2) be involved in the general curriculum; and
(3) progress in the general curriculum.
The purpose of this brief is to explain the meanings of the terms access, involvement, and
progress in relation to the general curriculum. These new requirements have the potential to
lead to improved educational outcomes for students with disabilities.
Who qualifies as a "student with a disability"?
In order to qualify for special education services under IDEA '97, a student must satisfy
two requirements: (1) the student must have one of the disabilities specified in the law; and
(2) the disability results in the need for special education and related services. IDEA '97
lists the disability categories that may entitle a child to receive special education and
related services:
-
Mental retardation
-
Hearing impairments, including deafness
-
Speech or language impairments
-
Visual impairments, including blindness
-
Emotional disturbance
-
Orthopedic impairments
-
Autism
-
Traumatic brain injury
-
Other health impairments
-
Specific learning disabilities
In addition, a child aged three through nine who is experiencing developmental delays, as
defined by the State, may be eligible for services under IDEA at the discretion of the State
and local educational agency.
What is the "general curriculum"?
The regulations implementing IDEA '97 describe the general curriculum
as the same curriculum as that established for students without disabilities. The general
curriculum can be thought of as "the overall plan for instruction adopted by a school or school
system. Its purpose is to guide instructional activities and provide consistency of expectations,
content, methods, and outcomes" (Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose, and Jackson, 2002). In recent years,
the general curriculum has come to be influenced more and more by the adoption of standards
by many states, and local school districts (Nolet and McLaughlin, 2000).
What does "access" mean?
(1) Access before IDEA '97
Congress passed the first national special education law in 1975. At the time, Congress
estimated that one million children with disabilities were being excluded from public schools.
The purpose of the 1975 law was to give children with disabilities the right to a public
education, individually tailored to address disability-specific needs. This initial law
focused on providing students with disabilities with access to special
education services and physical access to school
buildings. The 1975 law did not require schools to provide a specific level of education to
children with disabilities. During these early years, the concepts of mainstreaming and
inclusion also evolved, but tended to center on the placement of students with disabilities in
the regular education classroom without attention to necessary supplementary aids and services,
accommodations, modifications, and supports.
By the early 1990s, many improvements had been made in the education of children with
disabilities (see Table 1, page 4). Increased numbers of students with disabilities were
graduating from high school and obtaining post-school jobs (U.S. Department of Education,
1995; Wagner, Blackorby, Cameto, Hebbeler, and Newman, 1993). In addition, the number of
children living in separate institutions had decreased dramatically. Children with the most
significant disabilities were attending public schools and had the opportunity to interact on
a social basis with their peers (U.S. Department of Education, 1995).
In spite of these positive changes, however, students with disabilities still faced many
difficulties. For example, research showed that students with disabilities tended to fail
classes and drop out of school at a higher rate than students without disabilities (U.S.
Department of Education, 1995). In passing IDEA '97, Congress explained, "Despite the
progress, the promise of the law has not been fulfilled" (H.R. Rep. No. 105-95, at 85 (1997)).
Table 1. Education of children with disabilities
prior to 1975 and in 1993-94
|
Prior to 1975
|
1993-94
|
-
1,000,000 children with disabilities
were excluded from public schools
-
Families often had to find education for
their children in settings not part of the public schools, far from their homes and at
their own expense
-
More than 50% of children with
disabilities did not receive appropriate educational services
-
Many children who attended public
schools had undetected disabilities that inhibited their educational progress
|
-
12% of elementary and
secondary students attending public schools received special education
services (U.S. Department of Education, 1996)
-
More than 95% of children with
disabilities were educated in "regular school buildings" as opposed to separate
facilities (U.S. Department of Education, 1996)
-
43.4% of students with disabilities (aged 6-21) were educated in the general
education classroom (U.S. Department of Education, 1996)
-
16% of students with disabilities
completed four years of college or more (U.S. Department of Education,
1996, Table 3.1, citing Louis Harris and Associates, 1994)
|
Note. All of the information in column 1 is from 20 U.S.C. § 1400(c)(2).
(2) Access according to IDEA '97
The meaning of access in IDEA '97 far exceeds the earlier definition of access and goes
beyond the concepts of mainstreaming and inclusion. Under IDEA '97, students with disabilities
have a right to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum. IDEA '97 has therefore
raised expectations for the performance of students with disabilities. Providing students with
disabilities with access to the general curriculum, however, is only the first step.
Involvement in and progress in the general
curriculum can be viewed as giving the specific details about how access is to be achieved.
What does "involvement in" the general curriculum mean?
IDEA '97 states that students with disabilities must be involved in
the general curriculum, and the law includes several requirements that help explain this
involvement: (1) ensuring that the student's IEP goals address how the student will be involved
in and progress in the general curriculum; (2) specifying in the student's IEP appropriate
supplementary aids and services, accommodations, modifications, or supports that will help the
student be involved in and progress in the general curriculum; and (3) explaining in the
student's IEP why he or she will not participate with children without disabilities in the
regular classroom.
(1) Ensuring that the student's IEP goals address the student's involvement in and
progress in the general curriculum
A student's individualized education program (IEP) plays a major role in helping the student
be involved in the general curriculum. Under IDEA '97, a student's IEP must state how the
student's disability affects his or her involvement in and progress in the general curriculum
and must contain measurable annual goals (including benchmarks or short-term objectives) that
address how the student will be involved in and progress in the general curriculum. This is a
marked change from the past when IEP goals, although based on the specific needs of the
individual student, did not necessarily relate to the general curriculum. In order to help
align IEP goals with the general curriculum, IDEA '97 also requires that the student's
regular education teacher (if the student is, or may be, participating in the regular education
environment), as well as a representative from the district who is knowledgeable about the
general curriculum, be members of the IEP team.
(2) Specifying in the student's IEP appropriate supplementary aids and services,
accommodations, modifications, or supports
The child's IEP must specify the special education and related services and supplementary
aids and services to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of
the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will enable the student to
be involved in and progress in the general curriculum. In the past, students with disabilities
were sometimes placed in the regular education classroom for the sake of inclusion without any
help or support. IDEA '97 addressed this problem by requiring that supplementary aids and
services, accommodations, modifications, and supports play a more important role in a student's
education.
Supplementary aids and services are aids, services and other supports
that enable the student to be educated together with children without disabilities to the
maximum extent appropriate. In the field of special education, there is an important
distinction between the terms accommodation and modification. Generally, an
accommodation is a curricular, environmental, or testing adaptation
that does not fundamentally alter the general curriculum, lower standards, or change the
construct being measured on a test. The purpose of an accommodation is to level the playing
field. By contrast, generally, a modification is a "substantial"
adaptation that results in a fundamental alteration (Freedman, 2000). If the student requires
only modifications or accommodations in order to progress in a specific area of the general
curriculum, the IEP does not need to include a goal in this area. The IEP, however, does need
to specify these modifications or accommodations. The IEP must also specify supports
for school personnel.
Decisions as to which supplementary aids and services, accommodations, modifications or
supports are appropriate for a particular student are to be made on an individualized basis by
the IEP team. It is important that these decisions do not substantially lower curriculum
standards and thus deny the student access to the general curriculum.
The approach should be to create from the beginning a curriculum with built-in supports
for diverse learners, rather than to fit supplementary aids and services, accommodations,
modifications, or supports after the fact (Hitchcock et al., 2002). This kind
of approach, called Universal Design for Learning (UDL), reflects an understanding that each
learner is unique and acknowledges the need to create learning experiences that help each
individual maximize his or her potential to be involved in the general curriculum (Center for
Applied Special Technology (CAST), 2002).
(3) Explaining in the student's IEP why he or she will not participate in the regular
class
IDEA '97 does not require that all students with disabilities participate with children
without disabilities in the regular class. If it is not possible for a student to participate
in the regular class, the student's IEP must explain why this is the case. In addition, a
student cannot be removed from education in age-appropriate regular classrooms solely because
the student needs modifications in the general curriculum. Even if a student is not in the
regular classroom, the student's IEP goals must address the general curriculum. Decisions
about the appropriate educational placement of students with disabilities are to be made on
an individualized basis by a group of persons, including the parents, and others knowledgeable
about the student, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options.
What does "progress in" the general curriculum mean?
It is not enough for students with disabilities to participate in the general curriculum.
The law also requires that the IEP address progress in the general
curriculum. Progress in the general curriculum can be thought of as involving three parts:
(1) measuring the student's progress in reaching IEP goals; (2) including students with
disabilities in State and district-wide assessments, with appropriate accommodations, where
necessary; and (3) developing State performance goals and indicators and providing reports on
progress toward meeting these goals and indicators.
(1) Measuring the student's progress in reaching IEP goals
Under IDEA '97, schools have to make a good faith effort to help a student reach his or her
IEP goals. In order to ensure that the student is making progress, the IEP goals must be
"measurable." In addition, IEPs must state:
IEPs are to be reviewed annually and revised, as appropriate, to address lack of progress
toward IEP goals and lack of progress in the general curriculum. Similarly, as part of the
process of reevaluation that occurs at least every three years, a child's progress toward
IEP goals and participation in the general curriculum must be examined.
(2) Including students with disabilities in State and district-wide assessments,
with appropriate accommodations, where necessary
IDEA '97 requires that students with disabilities take part in State and district-wide
assessments with appropriate accommodations or modifications in administration. The
student's IEP must state:
-
The necessary accommodations or modifications the student will need in order to take part in State and district-wide assessments; or
-
Why that assessment is not appropriate for the student and how the student will be assessed.
An accommodation in testing is an adaptation that does not fundamentally change the nature
of what is being measured by the test. States sometimes call these adaptations "reasonable
accommodations." In contrast, a testing modification is a substantial adaptation that results
in a fundamental alteration (Freedman, 2000). The accommodations or modifications that a
student receives in testing should match those that he or she receives in the classroom.
When students are unable to take part in the general assessment with accommodations or
modifications, they are to receive an alternate assessment, which is
a completely different measure of a child's learning progress for example, a portfolio of the
child's work may be evaluated. The purpose of an alternate assessment is the same as that of
the general assessment to measure the student's progress.
(3) Developing State performance goals and indicators and providing reports on
progress toward meeting these goals and indicators
IDEA '97 requires that State education agencies:
-
Develop performance goals for students with disabilities that are as similar to the goals for students without disabilities as much as possible;
-
Develop performance indicators to measure the progress of students with disabilities toward the achievement of these goals that, at a minimum, address graduation rates, drop-out rates, and performance on assessments; and
-
Provide reports every two years to the Secretary and the public that include information about the progress of students with disabilities in the State toward meeting the established performance goals and indicators. The reports must include data on the performance of students with disabilities on assessments together with all other children, as well as data regarding the performance of students with disabilities alone.
In addition, States will need to consider the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001 (NCLB), which focuses on accountability for the performance of all students. NCLB also
requires that State assessments provide for the participation of all students, including
students with disabilities, and provide for appropriate accommodations for students with
disabilities.
References
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). Summary
of Universal Design for Learning concepts.
Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/udl/index.cfm?i=7.
Freedman, M.K. (2000). Testing, Grading and Granting Diplomas to Special
Education students: Individuals with Disabilities Education Law Report - Special Report No. 18.
Horsham, PA: LRP Publications.
Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing
new access to the general curriculum: Universal Design for Learning. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 35(2), 8-17.
H.R. Rep. No. 105-95, (1997).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400
et seq. (1997).
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. §§6301 et
seq. (2001).
Nolet, V. & McLaughlin, M.J. (2000). Accessing the general
curriculum: Including students with disabilities in standards-based reform.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
U.S. Department of Education (1995). Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act amendments of 1995: Reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA). Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Education (1996). To assure the free appropriate
public education to all children with disabilities: Eighteenth annual report to Congress
on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Washington, D.C.
Wagner, M., Blackorby, J., Cameto, R., Hebbeler, K., &
Newman, K. (1993). The transition experiences of young people with disabilities.
Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Research International.
Download Options
To download documents:
- Windows users: Right click the link to the document and choose Save Target As... from the popup menu.
- Mac users: Control-click the link to the document and choose Download Link to Disk from the popup menu.
|
PDF:
In order to download or print PDF versions of documents, you need to have Acrobat Reader installed. If you don't have Acrobat Reader installed, download the Acrobat Installer from Adobe's Acrobat web page and then install the Acrobat Reader before continuing.
|
Page updated December 05, 2003

© 1999-2009 CAST,
40 Harvard Mills Square, Foundry Street,
Wakefield, MA 01880-3233,
USA.
Telephone: +1 (781) 245-2212
Email:
cast@cast.org
This Web Site was developed pursuant to cooperative agreement #H324H990004
under CFDA 84.324H between CAST and the Office of Special Education
Programs, U.S. Department of Education. However, the opinions expressed
herein do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the U.S.
Department of Education or the Office of Special Education Programs and no
endorsement by that office should be inferred.
|