Pub Date : 2022-08-05DOI: 10.1177/10442073221114113
Joan E. West, Virginia L. McLaughlin, K. Shepherd, Rebecca Cokley
The 30th anniversary of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) offered an opportunity for reflection on ways that ADA has influenced—and might further shape—the provision of special education under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), now in its 47th year of implementation. After reviewing the purposes, provisions, and contexts of the two laws, the authors discuss the interplay between IDEA and ADA within several important areas, including the delivery of student services, creation of system-wide frameworks, focus on postsecondary outcomes, and programs in higher education. The authors then consider three factors that create tensions for the ways in which IDEA currently defines disability and addresses student needs: changing demographics in public schools, standards-based reform in education, and the growth of disability rights and activism. The article concludes with recommendations for moving ahead by deepening and expanding the dialogue between special education and the disability rights communities; amplifying the voices of graduates of IDEA; engaging leadership of independent federal advisory agencies to infuse ADA principles into IDEA; and exploring international thinking, scholarship, and practice related to serving all students effectively and inclusively.
{"title":"The Americans With Disabilities Act and the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act: Intersection, Divergence, and the Path Forward","authors":"Joan E. West, Virginia L. McLaughlin, K. Shepherd, Rebecca Cokley","doi":"10.1177/10442073221114113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221114113","url":null,"abstract":"The 30th anniversary of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) offered an opportunity for reflection on ways that ADA has influenced—and might further shape—the provision of special education under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), now in its 47th year of implementation. After reviewing the purposes, provisions, and contexts of the two laws, the authors discuss the interplay between IDEA and ADA within several important areas, including the delivery of student services, creation of system-wide frameworks, focus on postsecondary outcomes, and programs in higher education. The authors then consider three factors that create tensions for the ways in which IDEA currently defines disability and addresses student needs: changing demographics in public schools, standards-based reform in education, and the growth of disability rights and activism. The article concludes with recommendations for moving ahead by deepening and expanding the dialogue between special education and the disability rights communities; amplifying the voices of graduates of IDEA; engaging leadership of independent federal advisory agencies to infuse ADA principles into IDEA; and exploring international thinking, scholarship, and practice related to serving all students effectively and inclusively.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44532030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-03DOI: 10.1177/10442073221114102
Catherine Kramarczuk Voulgarides, A. Aylward
In this article, we document patterns of local education agency (LEA) disproportionality citations within one U.S. state spanning an 8-year time period immediately following the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to understand the following: (a) how patterns of disproportionality citations manifest over time in suburban locales, and (b) how often LEAs experience and subsequently are able to successfully address a citation for racial inequity in special education outcomes. We descriptively investigated sequence patterns across suburban locales within one state—New York State (NYS), which serves as a representative case for our analysis. We focus on suburban locales because prior research has documented that a school district’s location (e.g., suburban) relates to the time frame within which a school district was able to address a disproportionality citation. In addition, locale-specific characteristics such as segregation in schools and communities and sociodemographic conditions influence the occurrence of racial disproportionality. Our primary questions driving the descriptive inquiry were as follows: How does variation in sequence patterns for IDEA disproportionality citations manifest within and between suburban locales in NYS? What are the policy implications of these patterns? We conclude with specific recommendations for improving IDEA racial equity policy.
{"title":"Enduring Equity Questions: A Sequence Analysis of Citations in Response to Racial Inequity via the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act","authors":"Catherine Kramarczuk Voulgarides, A. Aylward","doi":"10.1177/10442073221114102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221114102","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we document patterns of local education agency (LEA) disproportionality citations within one U.S. state spanning an 8-year time period immediately following the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to understand the following: (a) how patterns of disproportionality citations manifest over time in suburban locales, and (b) how often LEAs experience and subsequently are able to successfully address a citation for racial inequity in special education outcomes. We descriptively investigated sequence patterns across suburban locales within one state—New York State (NYS), which serves as a representative case for our analysis. We focus on suburban locales because prior research has documented that a school district’s location (e.g., suburban) relates to the time frame within which a school district was able to address a disproportionality citation. In addition, locale-specific characteristics such as segregation in schools and communities and sociodemographic conditions influence the occurrence of racial disproportionality. Our primary questions driving the descriptive inquiry were as follows: How does variation in sequence patterns for IDEA disproportionality citations manifest within and between suburban locales in NYS? What are the policy implications of these patterns? We conclude with specific recommendations for improving IDEA racial equity policy.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"34 1","pages":"73 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43687289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-07DOI: 10.1177/10442073221107079
Debra L. Brucker, E. Lauer, S. Boege
Using data from the 2010 to 2017 U.S. National Health Interview survey, the authors utilized bivariate and multivariate regression analyses to estimate the percentage and odds of having multiple chronic conditions (two or more, three or more) among U.S. adults ages 65 and over with and without disabilities, controlling for sociodemographic factors and presence of psychological distress. Older adults with and without disabilities in the United States most frequently reported having hypertension, arthritis, and diabetes. Regression results indicate that older adults with disabilities are significantly more likely to experience two or more and three or more chronic conditions than older adults without disabilities, controlling for sociodemographic factors and health behaviors. These findings highlight a need for improvement in coordinated care that considers both disability and multiple chronic conditions in the management of patient health to support well-being in aging.
{"title":"Americans Aging with Disabilities Are More Likely to Have Multiple Chronic Conditions","authors":"Debra L. Brucker, E. Lauer, S. Boege","doi":"10.1177/10442073221107079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221107079","url":null,"abstract":"Using data from the 2010 to 2017 U.S. National Health Interview survey, the authors utilized bivariate and multivariate regression analyses to estimate the percentage and odds of having multiple chronic conditions (two or more, three or more) among U.S. adults ages 65 and over with and without disabilities, controlling for sociodemographic factors and presence of psychological distress. Older adults with and without disabilities in the United States most frequently reported having hypertension, arthritis, and diabetes. Regression results indicate that older adults with disabilities are significantly more likely to experience two or more and three or more chronic conditions than older adults without disabilities, controlling for sociodemographic factors and health behaviors. These findings highlight a need for improvement in coordinated care that considers both disability and multiple chronic conditions in the management of patient health to support well-being in aging.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"34 1","pages":"52 - 60"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42938494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-17DOI: 10.1177/10442073221097713
D. Fuchs, Hilary C. Mirowitz, Jennifer K Gilbert
Many K–Grade 12 students with disabilities (SWDs) in the United States spend a large portion of their school day in general classrooms because of a prevailing view that they are more appropriately challenging and beneficial than other educational placements. We questioned this belief by exploring a “dosage” hypothesis: The more time SWD are in general classrooms the better they do academically. We assembled a database spanning 1998 to 2015, inclusive. For 9 of these years, we found both Office of Special Education Program’s placement data and National Center for Education Statistics’ reading data. We ran multilevel growth models to describe trends across time for the placement and reading data. Findings indicated a steadily increasing trend for general class placement and a positive but decelerating trend for reading performance, which together produced a widening placement–performance gap after 2007. Among 10 states/jurisdictions with the strongest positive trends for general class placement, there was no uniform pattern of reading performance across years. In short, we found little corroboration of a dosage hypothesis.
{"title":"Exploring the Truth of Michael Yudin’s Claim: The More Time Students With Disabilities Spend in General Classrooms, the Better They Do Academically","authors":"D. Fuchs, Hilary C. Mirowitz, Jennifer K Gilbert","doi":"10.1177/10442073221097713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221097713","url":null,"abstract":"Many K–Grade 12 students with disabilities (SWDs) in the United States spend a large portion of their school day in general classrooms because of a prevailing view that they are more appropriately challenging and beneficial than other educational placements. We questioned this belief by exploring a “dosage” hypothesis: The more time SWD are in general classrooms the better they do academically. We assembled a database spanning 1998 to 2015, inclusive. For 9 of these years, we found both Office of Special Education Program’s placement data and National Center for Education Statistics’ reading data. We ran multilevel growth models to describe trends across time for the placement and reading data. Findings indicated a steadily increasing trend for general class placement and a positive but decelerating trend for reading performance, which together produced a widening placement–performance gap after 2007. Among 10 states/jurisdictions with the strongest positive trends for general class placement, there was no uniform pattern of reading performance across years. In short, we found little corroboration of a dosage hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"236 - 252"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46893087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-03DOI: 10.1177/10442073221094808
Emily M. Lund
In response to concerns about liability and safety, many colleges and universities have instituted Behavior Intervention Teams (BITs) to help assess and intervene with students who may pose a risk of harm to self or others. Students, lawyers, and advocates have raised concerns about some aspects of the implementation of BITs and related institutional policies, particularly with regard to students who are suicidal and those who engage in self-injurious behavior. Specifically, BITs are on complicated legal ground regarding confidentiality, disability civil rights law, and potential discriminatory or disparate treatment of students with psychiatric disabilities. In addition to reviewing the nature and background of BITs, this article reviews the professional, ethical, and legal issues surrounding confidentiality in the context of university intervention with students who are at risk for harm to self and the potentially applicable of disability civil rights law to BIT intervention with students who are suicidal. Suggestions for alternative and supplemental interventions, especially widespread use of suicide gatekeeping, are provided. Finally, the need for advocates who are knowledgeable in disability civil rights law is highlighted.
{"title":"Issues of Confidentiality and Potential Disability Discrimination in Behavior Intervention Team Responses to College Student Suicidality","authors":"Emily M. Lund","doi":"10.1177/10442073221094808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221094808","url":null,"abstract":"In response to concerns about liability and safety, many colleges and universities have instituted Behavior Intervention Teams (BITs) to help assess and intervene with students who may pose a risk of harm to self or others. Students, lawyers, and advocates have raised concerns about some aspects of the implementation of BITs and related institutional policies, particularly with regard to students who are suicidal and those who engage in self-injurious behavior. Specifically, BITs are on complicated legal ground regarding confidentiality, disability civil rights law, and potential discriminatory or disparate treatment of students with psychiatric disabilities. In addition to reviewing the nature and background of BITs, this article reviews the professional, ethical, and legal issues surrounding confidentiality in the context of university intervention with students who are at risk for harm to self and the potentially applicable of disability civil rights law to BIT intervention with students who are suicidal. Suggestions for alternative and supplemental interventions, especially widespread use of suicide gatekeeping, are provided. Finally, the need for advocates who are knowledgeable in disability civil rights law is highlighted.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"209 - 219"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45718853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-03DOI: 10.1177/10442073221094811
K. Shogren, Jesse R. Pace, D. Wittenburg, Sheida K. Raley, Tyler A. Hicks, Graham G. Rifenbark, K. Lane, Mark H. Anderson
Differences in perceptions of disability between students and administrators can play a role in youth’s educational experience. This study used data from a cluster randomized controlled trial (C-RCT) of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI) to first compare student self-report of disability status to matched administrative data and second to examine the impact of the data source utilized on trial outcomes. The findings demonstrate substantive gaps between self-reports and administrative reports of disability. While some differences might be expected, the size of the differences is notable, especially given that many students identified as having an Individualized Education Program in administrative data did not self-identify as receiving services or having a disability. The findings advance understanding of discrepancies in self-reported disability and administrative data in secondary intervention research. We also found the interpretation of group differences (students with vs. without disabilities) on trial outcomes was sensitive to the source of the data (self vs. administrative) used to establish disability status. This finding can inform future research and policy, as the data source selected to define disability populations across research studies likely has substantive impacts on conclusions drawn about the impact of interventions on students with disabilities. We cannot identify all the factors driving these differences. Nonetheless, the findings underscore the importance of providing clarity about decisions made in defining disability populations in intervention research.
{"title":"Self-Report and Administrative Data on Disability and IEP Status: Examining Differences and Impacts on Intervention Outcomes","authors":"K. Shogren, Jesse R. Pace, D. Wittenburg, Sheida K. Raley, Tyler A. Hicks, Graham G. Rifenbark, K. Lane, Mark H. Anderson","doi":"10.1177/10442073221094811","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221094811","url":null,"abstract":"Differences in perceptions of disability between students and administrators can play a role in youth’s educational experience. This study used data from a cluster randomized controlled trial (C-RCT) of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI) to first compare student self-report of disability status to matched administrative data and second to examine the impact of the data source utilized on trial outcomes. The findings demonstrate substantive gaps between self-reports and administrative reports of disability. While some differences might be expected, the size of the differences is notable, especially given that many students identified as having an Individualized Education Program in administrative data did not self-identify as receiving services or having a disability. The findings advance understanding of discrepancies in self-reported disability and administrative data in secondary intervention research. We also found the interpretation of group differences (students with vs. without disabilities) on trial outcomes was sensitive to the source of the data (self vs. administrative) used to establish disability status. This finding can inform future research and policy, as the data source selected to define disability populations across research studies likely has substantive impacts on conclusions drawn about the impact of interventions on students with disabilities. We cannot identify all the factors driving these differences. Nonetheless, the findings underscore the importance of providing clarity about decisions made in defining disability populations in intervention research.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"253 - 266"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42764945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-03DOI: 10.1177/10442073221094796
H. Walker, Gary Brown
This commentary addresses the justification provided by the Michigan school superintendent for returning Ethan Crumbley, of Oxford High School, to his classroom following some red flag warnings about him from two of his teachers prior to the school shootings. It suggests warning signs and prevention strategies that could be used to reduce school violence in the future. The commentary argues that extreme behavioral events rather than the frequency of disciplinary problems are more likely harbingers of school violence tragedies.
{"title":"School Shootings: Learning to Look for the Right Signals","authors":"H. Walker, Gary Brown","doi":"10.1177/10442073221094796","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221094796","url":null,"abstract":"This commentary addresses the justification provided by the Michigan school superintendent for returning Ethan Crumbley, of Oxford High School, to his classroom following some red flag warnings about him from two of his teachers prior to the school shootings. It suggests warning signs and prevention strategies that could be used to reduce school violence in the future. The commentary argues that extreme behavioral events rather than the frequency of disciplinary problems are more likely harbingers of school violence tragedies.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"223 - 224"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47476732","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01Epub Date: 2021-05-10DOI: 10.1177/10442073211010124
Nicole Agaronnik, Areej El-Jawahri, Lisa Iezzoni
Objective: More than 30 years since enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, people with disability continue to face physical access barriers, notably inaccessible medical diagnostic equipment, in clinical settings. Access barriers affect breast cancer screening and treatment for women with disability.
Methods: We used standard diagnosis codes and natural language processing to screen electronic health records (EHRs) in a digital data repository from a large healthcare delivery system for patients with pre-existing mobility disability diagnosed with breast cancer between 2005-2017. We reviewed EHRs of 20 patients, using conventional content analysis to examine breast cancer diagnosis and treatment experiences.
Results: Clinicians noted challenges positioning patients for routine procedures including manual breast exam, screening mammography, and breast biopsies. Given challenges accommodating disability for adjuvant therapies, mastectomy was favored over breast-conserving options despite early stages of diagnosis. Notations contained little information about proactive problem-solving for arranging accommodations.
Conclusions: Notations described physical access barriers for breast cancer detection and treatment, with limited planning for mitigating barriers. Despite 2017 promulgation of federal Standards for Accessible Medical Diagnostic Equipment, implementing these standards requires further rulemaking.
{"title":"Implications of Physical Access Barriers for Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment in Women with Mobility Disability.","authors":"Nicole Agaronnik, Areej El-Jawahri, Lisa Iezzoni","doi":"10.1177/10442073211010124","DOIUrl":"10.1177/10442073211010124","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>More than 30 years since enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, people with disability continue to face physical access barriers, notably inaccessible medical diagnostic equipment, in clinical settings. Access barriers affect breast cancer screening and treatment for women with disability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used standard diagnosis codes and natural language processing to screen electronic health records (EHRs) in a digital data repository from a large healthcare delivery system for patients with pre-existing mobility disability diagnosed with breast cancer between 2005-2017. We reviewed EHRs of 20 patients, using conventional content analysis to examine breast cancer diagnosis and treatment experiences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinicians noted challenges positioning patients for routine procedures including manual breast exam, screening mammography, and breast biopsies. Given challenges accommodating disability for adjuvant therapies, mastectomy was favored over breast-conserving options despite early stages of diagnosis. Notations contained little information about proactive problem-solving for arranging accommodations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Notations described physical access barriers for breast cancer detection and treatment, with limited planning for mitigating barriers. Despite 2017 promulgation of federal Standards for Accessible Medical Diagnostic Equipment, implementing these standards requires further rulemaking.</p>","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"46-54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9307057/pdf/nihms-1764869.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9912751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1177/10442073221096392
C. Ward, Tanya Ihlo, Kathleen Ryan Jackson, Sophia Farmer
There is a continued call for the use of practices supported by evidence to improve the quality and effectiveness of services provided for students with disabilities. Despite best intentions, our education systems continue to struggle to adopt these practices and transfer them into consistent, sustained use by practitioners. Implementation science, the multi-disciplinary study of methods and strategies to promote use of research findings in practice, seeks to address this by providing frameworks to guide creation of conditions that facilitate use of evidence-based practices. The present article describes how an implementation science approach, Active Implementation Frameworks, was used by a national technical assistance center to cultivate systemic change and create improved outcomes for students with disabilities within several state, regional, and local education agencies. A summary of the lessons learned thus far and resulting considerations for practice and policy are presented. A key lesson was that state education agencies (SEAs) supporting districts and schools in implementation of a specific, educator–student-level practice realized improved outcomes for their students with disabilities. SEAs implementing frameworks or processes without an operationalized and measurable educator–student- level practice had limited or no evidence of improved student outcomes.
{"title":"Effective Implementation Capacity to Impact Change Within State Education Systems to Support Students With Disabilities","authors":"C. Ward, Tanya Ihlo, Kathleen Ryan Jackson, Sophia Farmer","doi":"10.1177/10442073221096392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221096392","url":null,"abstract":"There is a continued call for the use of practices supported by evidence to improve the quality and effectiveness of services provided for students with disabilities. Despite best intentions, our education systems continue to struggle to adopt these practices and transfer them into consistent, sustained use by practitioners. Implementation science, the multi-disciplinary study of methods and strategies to promote use of research findings in practice, seeks to address this by providing frameworks to guide creation of conditions that facilitate use of evidence-based practices. The present article describes how an implementation science approach, Active Implementation Frameworks, was used by a national technical assistance center to cultivate systemic change and create improved outcomes for students with disabilities within several state, regional, and local education agencies. A summary of the lessons learned thus far and resulting considerations for practice and policy are presented. A key lesson was that state education agencies (SEAs) supporting districts and schools in implementation of a specific, educator–student-level practice realized improved outcomes for their students with disabilities. SEAs implementing frameworks or processes without an operationalized and measurable educator–student- level practice had limited or no evidence of improved student outcomes.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"34 1","pages":"104 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42604575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1177/10442073221094806
Sarah A. Nagro, Andrew M. Markelz, Richelle Davis, Anna Macedonia, Kevin Monnin
Access to education for all students has been long sought. Once defined as physical access to a school building, the concept of access has evolved since Brown v. Board of Education. The purpose of this policy review, conducted through archival research, is to examine the evolution of access to K–Grade 12 education for all students, with an emphasis on students with disabilities who are general education students first, to understand the implications of the 2020 U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Gary B. vs. Whitmer decision. For the first time, a federal court ruled that the constitution affords all students “a fundamental right to a basic minimum education.” Specifically, the evolving concept of access to education for all students, including students with disabilities, across (a) the school building, (b) curricular opportunities, (c) education outcomes, and (d) a college- and career-ready curriculum is outlined using landmark K–Grade 12 federal education legislation, court cases, and policy initiatives. Taken together, a basic minimum education includes access to challenging academic learning objectives, an emphasis on literacy, provision of educational materials of sufficient quantity and quality, and an adequate teacher workforce. Meeting these expectations assures genuine access to a public education for all students.
{"title":"The Evolution of Access to Education Through Landmark Legislation, Court Cases, and Policy Initiatives Setting Precedent for The Gary B. Court Decision","authors":"Sarah A. Nagro, Andrew M. Markelz, Richelle Davis, Anna Macedonia, Kevin Monnin","doi":"10.1177/10442073221094806","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221094806","url":null,"abstract":"Access to education for all students has been long sought. Once defined as physical access to a school building, the concept of access has evolved since Brown v. Board of Education. The purpose of this policy review, conducted through archival research, is to examine the evolution of access to K–Grade 12 education for all students, with an emphasis on students with disabilities who are general education students first, to understand the implications of the 2020 U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Gary B. vs. Whitmer decision. For the first time, a federal court ruled that the constitution affords all students “a fundamental right to a basic minimum education.” Specifically, the evolving concept of access to education for all students, including students with disabilities, across (a) the school building, (b) curricular opportunities, (c) education outcomes, and (d) a college- and career-ready curriculum is outlined using landmark K–Grade 12 federal education legislation, court cases, and policy initiatives. Taken together, a basic minimum education includes access to challenging academic learning objectives, an emphasis on literacy, provision of educational materials of sufficient quantity and quality, and an adequate teacher workforce. Meeting these expectations assures genuine access to a public education for all students.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"289 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44118589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：