The document discusses several key trends and issues in special education: 1) Normalization and deinstitutionalization promoted integrating those with disabilities into regular society and schools rather than institutions. 2) The Regular Education Initiative of 1986 argued that general education should be primarily responsible for students with disabilities. 3) Full inclusion advocates placing all students with disabilities in general education classrooms, but others argue this is not practically or empirically supported. 4) Early intervention programs, individualized family service plans, and preschool help children with risks and disabilities develop skills to avoid delays.

1. Current Trends and Issues in Sped

2. Normalization
• The key principle toward more integration of
people with disabilities into society
• Espoused in Scandinavia in 1969
• means a philosophical belief in SPED that every
individual, even the most disabled, should have
an educational and living environment as close to
normal as possible.
• both means and ends for disabled children
should be as much like those for nondisabled
students.

3. Deinstitutionalization
• A social movement of the 1960’s
• Based on a pictorial essay “Christmas on
Purgatory” on the squalid conditions of
institutional life of students with mental
retardation
• this caused more and more children with
disabilities to be raised by their families.

4. The Regular Education Initiative
• Introduced by former Assistant Sec. Of
Education, Madeline C. Will (1986)
• A philosophy that maintains that general
education rather than special education
should be primarily responsible for educating
students with disabilities.
• The result of advocates’ view regarding the
half-hearted attempt to integrate students
with disabilities (mainstreaming)

5. Full Inclusion
• Advocated by REI
• Elements of Full Inclusion
– All student with disabilities no matter the types or
severities of disabilities attend all classes in
general education
– All students with disabilities attend their
neighborhood schools
– General education not special education, assumes
responsibility for students with disabilities

6. Premises of Full Inclusion
• Labelling people is harmful
• Special education pull-out programs have
been ineffective
• People with disabilities should be viewed as a
minority group
• Ethics should take precedence over empricism

7. Arguments against Full Inclusion
• General educators, special educators, and
parents are largely satisfied with the current
continuum of placements
• General educators are unwilling and /or
unable to cope with all students with
disabilities
• Justifying full inclusion by asserting that
people with disabilities are a minority is
flawed

8. Arguments against Full Inclusion
• Full-inclusion proponents’ unwillingness to
consider empirical evidence is professionally
irresponsible
• The available empirical evidence does not
support full inclusion
• In the absence of date to support one service
delivery model, special education must
preserve the continuum of placements

9. Mainstreaming Practices
• Prereferral teams
• Peer collaboration
• Collaborative consultation
• Cooperative teaching
• Cooperative learning
• Peer tutoring
• Partial participation
• Curriculum materials designed to change
attitudes

10. Early Intervention
• A term used to refer to a range of services
provided to children, parents, and families
during pregnancy, infancy and/or early
childhood.
• Previously known a nursery schools or
preschools in 1930’s
• Supported by PL 99-457 IFSP for children ages
5 yrs. old and below including infants

11. Why Early Intervention?
• The early the program of intervention the
more complex skills the child will learn
• Avoiding developmental delays
• Preventing additional delays
• Help families adjust to having a child with
disabilities thus giving parents the skills they
need to handle the child

12. What Puts Children at Risk?
• Genetic disorder
• Events during pregnancy and birth
• Child abuse or neglect
• Lower socioeconomic condition
• Substance abuse

13. What are Early Intervention Programs
• IFSP
– A statement of infant’s or toddler’s present level of
physical development
– A statement of the family’s resources, priorities, and
concerns relating to enhancing the development of
the family’s infant/toddler
– Statement of major outcomes expected to be
achieved for the infant/toddler
– Statement of specific early intervention services
necessary to meet the unique needs of the
infant/toddler

14. What are Early Intervention Programs
• IFSP
– Statement of natural environment in which early
intervention services shall appropriately be provided
– Projected dates for initiation of services and the
anticipated duration
– Identification of the service coordinator from the
profession most immediately relevant to the
infant/toddler services
– Steps to be taken to support the transition of the
toddler with a disability to preschool and other
appropriate services

15. Education Programs
• Early Childhood Intervention Center
• Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP)
• Day-Care and Early Childhood Centers
• Assessment and Curriculum
• Curriculum Options