Continuing the Continuum Conversation

I am in the process of getting interviews set up with state departments of education to see what they have to say about implementing their own legislative policies around the continuum of services.  So far I have some connection to Bambi J. Lockman , chief of the Bureau for Exceptional Education and Student Services (EESS) in the state of FL.  In preparing for my hopeful time with Bambi I began to do a little investigative work around FL's special education policies and value positions.  A quick look tells me that the continuum is not a hot topic.  It makes me wonder if the continuum regulations are adopted verbatim from the federal regulations, or if the state does in fact have their own version.  It also makes me wonder what message is sent to district leaders regarding the continuum of services and placement procedures for students identified as one's who would benefit from special education services.  Perhaps there is not a consistent message, leaving space for a variety of local interpretations.  We shall see.

It is these continuum thoughts that will propel me forward in this project.

Wish me luck!

Taking on the Continuum- Project Introduction

Taking on the Continuum- Project Introduction

Click the above line to hear an overview of my latest project: Taking on the Continuum.

This project is a critical look at the federal special education law. In particular I will be conducting an historical analysis of the continuum of alternative placement regulation within the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004).

Taking on the Continuum- Project Introduction

The historical underpinnings and current implications of the COS regulation will be examined, exploring both the intent of Congress and how the term is defined. Qualitative policy analysis and content analysis of congressional discourse methodologies will be used (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The entire federal act of the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children (EHA) and the most recent 2004 iteration of the bill will be used along with congressional hearings related to each. In addition, I hope to follow up this analysis with district (director of student services) and school site administrators (principal and vice principal)  interviews to examine local meanings of the continuum of service (or the continuum of alternative placements).  District placement data and placement procedures for service delivery will also be examined.

            As suggested by Taylor (2004) the concept of the continuum impacts individuals with disabilities across the lifespan.  EHA (now IDEA) introduced the COS language into educational decisions and one way to implementing the COS regulation was suggested by Reynolds' back in 1962 and again by Deno in 1970.  Both authors advocated for a continuum of least to most restrictive placement model based on an individual’s severity of disability or level of service needs.  Thus, according to Taylor the roots of the least to most restrictive placement model based on level of service need has confused segregated placement with level of service needs.  This confusion is evident in the school’s I've examined during other projects and has been communicated as  a barrier to full-inclusion for all students, especially those identified as needing intensive services.

            In addition, preliminary findings of this analysis are suggesting that a tension between placement in the general education setting as the best place for a student to be educated, the level of service need, and the continuum of alternative placements regulations of IDEA is deeply rooted. With the passing of P.L. 94-142 (EHA and IDEA today) the continuum language was introduced into law as a right, stating “each public agency must ensure that a continuum of alternative placements is available to meet the needs of children with disabilities for special education and related services” immediately following language that states the regular class as the preferred placement (EHA, 1974 & IDEA, 2004).  This language existed in its entirety in the first passing of the law and has remained the same through the most recent reauthorization (2004). It is this tension between regular class placement as the preferred LRE and the regulated concept of offering a continuum of alternative placements that I hope to explore.

Deno, E. (1970). Special education as developmental capital. Exceptional Children, 37, 229-237.

Education of the Handicapped Act means the Education of the Handicapped Act, 20 U.S.C. 1401-1461 (1975).

Hsieh, H-F., Shannon, S.E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis Qualitative   Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).

Reynolds, M (1962). A framework for considering some issues in special education. Exceptional Children, 28, 367-370.

Taylor, S.J. (2004). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the least restrictive environment. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29(4), 218-230.

Is it possible that I've found balance?

I am away for my annual girls weekend and while talking with some of my closest friends (see earlier post for a recap of how critical these people are in my PhD seeking life) I realized something- I have achieved balance.  Or at least some level of it.

My first year of doctoral studies was all consuming.  The balance was off and all my waking, and one may argue non waking, time was spent on doctoral work: Reading, writing, thinking, talking.  Not to mention engaging in constant internal dialogs around self-doubt. It was truly all consuming.  I remember spending weekends locked in a study room at our local library and becoming close with the local 5:00 AM coffee vendor.

 My kids struggled, my marriage struggled and I am sure my friendships struggled.  Talk about selfish.  I was miserable.  I almost quit.

However, today I am away for a fun weekend.  And I see this as an initial indicator that balance is upon me.  I am not locked in a library study room.  I am not crying over my painful self-induced doubt. I am having fun and am NOT consumed with PhDness. OK, OK.  I know.  I am still working, but I am also  fulfilling another important part of what makes me me: Friendship.

And you know what, I feel good.  I feel good about my studies.  I feel good about my projects.  I feel good about my own developing research (for the first time I am conducting my own- YIKES), my own teaching, my own work with schools, and most importantly I feel good about my family and my friends.  It was nice to hear this weekend that they feel the same way.

You know what else?  I am reflecting. This blog is proof of that.  That feels good too.  I had "no time" for this last year (so I told myself anyway) and now I am making time.  The 24 hour day is still the 24 hour day.  Time didn't happen to me. I made time and I continue to carve time out for all that is important to me.

Balance. It's a beautiful thing!

Maybe I will finish this thing (my PhD that is) after-all: Now that's powerful.

History

In my early school years I hated history- truthfully I did.  Recently, however I can't seem to get enough.

So I found THIS site. IT chronicles educational policy and developments over the course of 400+ years.  Beginning in 1607 and staying updated through the present, this site give a nice overview of critical turns in our nations educational history.  Dewey's in here. Piaget. Even the Mayflower made it in. 

Check it out.  If anything, it is a great conversation starter:  What's NOT in in?  Who's NOT represented. 

WHY?

Taking on the Continuum

Since entering the field of education, special education to be specific, I've been taught that every child has a right to the full continuum of services they need in order to access meaningful education.   These services may range from an enlarged worksheet, to more time on a test, occupational therapy or a one on one aide.  The level of need, or amount of services deemed necessary wasn't the issue.  Of concern to me was this: What does Joey need to be educated meaningfully with his peers?  I, based on this understanding, arranged educational opportunities that supported the growth of each student.  Place was never brought up as a discussion point.  Honestly, it never entered my mind.  Where the child was to be educated remained consistent, in the same class he or she would attend if he or she did not have a need for different specialized services (AKA determined to have a disability).

However, I am not naive and I realized early on in my career that this is not the same interpretation of the continuum of services that all my fellow colleagues across the country held.  Instead, many, I've learned, view the continuum of services as continuum of different places for kids with disabilities to be educated, ranging from the same classroom they would attend if they didn't recieve special education services (commonly referred to as the general education classroom) to receiving their education in a center school, institution or hospital (institutionalized or segregated education).  In other words, it seems to me that some of my peers interpret the continuum to be a legal legitimation to segregate kids based on level of need. Is this the case?

Federal education law for individuals with disabilities, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), states that districts must provide a continuum of alternative placements in the bill's regs.  Similarly, the current iteration of the bill itself (2004) and it's original regulations from 1975 mandate that children with disabilities receive a full continuum of related services.  To me, and I believe to congress, these are two different issues... or are they? Local interpretation seems to be quite confused on this issue, and has been since 1975 (the original passing of the law) (Taylor, 2004). 


To try and untangle the confusion I will investigate the definition and meaning of "the continuum". Over the next 3 months (or more- hopefully not though) I will be digging through federal regulations and congressional hearings from IDEA beginning in 1965, continuing through 2004 (the most recent passing of the bill).  I will also be looking at key supreme court cases that pushed congress to pass the bill and any research I can find on the issue (I don't think there is much- it seems to be a left alone topic.  I wonder why?).

My hope is that I can make some sense out of the varying interpretations and implementaion of "the continuum".  For you, it may seem like a waste of time, but then again you may not be a person with a disability that is forced to go to school 30 miles away from your brother because some group of professionals decided you needed "intense" services, and those "services" were only available way over there.  Becuase, if you were that person, I think (or at least hope) you'd understand why I need to do this.

Wish me luck and stay tuned.

I will update you as I go.

The making of a law

Recently, a professor of mine shared a site with me that explains the process by which an idea becomes law and I thought I'd share it.

Click here.

What I find most interesting in the flow chart is the linear process that is depicted.  I have a hard time accepting that ideas becoming law is a linear progression of citizen ideas traveling through steps until the a law is made.  You will notice the first step is "a concerned citizen" introduces an idea via introducing legislation.  The box makes this initial step seem simple and concrete.  It seems to say, "if you have an idea then draft a legislation."

Things aren't that simple.

 First, not all people are heard equally.  This means that you'd need to add "make the right connections to be heard" into this first box.  Second, not everyone has enough information to enable them to turn ideas into legislation.  So, "gain information to underpin ideas must be added" to this first step.  Then one must seriously think about  dimensions of power and elitism, aka who's ideas make it in to the public spotlight and who's don't?  What is the availability of information and do we all, as equal citizens, have equal access to that information.  Not to mention that people vary on their values and priorities in life.  So a debate over values may need to somehow enter this process.  The point is this: Making an idea into law is hardly linear.  Many, many layers of complexity exist.

I wonder if anyone has a flow chart for that?

School Choice

School choice has been a hot topic in education for quite some time now and many Americans do want choices.  Ask and you shall receive. There are now many avenues for parents to exercise choice in the education their children receive- thus gone are the days of simply going to school with your neighbors down the street.  At least not as your only option.  Current choices in "public" education range from neighborhood school choice options, private school vouchers to digital learning opportunities.  However, these choices vary from state to state (and in some cases district to district).

The heritage foundation has summarized each states' choice options.  Florida, as an example, has different avenues for choice, each with it's own corresponding state level bill, criteria for enrollment and process to access (hit the word below to link to each bill's text):

(1) Public School choice-  Opportunity scholarships (the right for parents to choose higher-performing school's if their child's school is failing year after year); charter school options (public schools that operate under a different set of standards than traditional public schools); and voluntary public neighborhood school choice (choosing to send your children to a school a few miles away instead of your neighborhood school).

(2) Private School Choice- The Mckay Scholarship for students with disabilities (allows parents of students receiving special education or 504 plan services to choose a different public school, or obtain a scholarship for private school tuition)

(3) On-line learning- Florida Virtual Schools (digital school options)

Each of these programs have their own criteria and paths parents must take to exercise choice.  Consistent with all is the right for increased parent input in their child's education and the right to high(er)-performing options. The idea is that if kids are receiving an education that is determined to NOT be "high-performing", or are not preparing them to live a meaningful and productive adult life, parents can choose "better" options.

I have no problem with that.  Of course not.  How could one argue against (1) increased control over one's destiny (aka adult outcomes), (2) the opportunity to leave a failing school (I mean is it really ethical to make a child attend a failing school year after year?), and/or (3) the potential for better post-school outcomes. The irony, however, is this... the array of choices are confusing and we have limited data to help guide which choice is most likely to drive increased outcomes (if any).  With such a wide array of options (aka choices) how is one to navigate the system?  Who is actually making a choice and who is not?  What are the actual outcomes on student learning and adult life? How do we  know?

Just to summarize for you the various choices was a daunting task.  I haven't even begun to discuss what steps are necessary to exercise each choice is, or how beneficial one is over the other.

Is choice a good idea?  To think about this an important questions remain:  Are school and student outcomes improving because of choice?  And, who's outcomes, exactly, are improving:  The students who are attending low performing schools year after year, or the ones who would be attending high performing school regardless of "choice"?

What do you think.....?

Analysis Paralysis... The Birth of my own Political Blogging

Things may begin looking a little different for you all on PhD unplugged, or maybe not.  But a few things are shifting:

(1) I am going to start blogging weekly- this is to address both my original promise to write more, and  my current policy class blog assignment. (It's also for you all- you know, to keep you captivated).

(2) Based on the above stated blogging assignment in my policy class (which is sure to be a GREAT class), you will begin to see a heavier emphasis on policy in the blog.

(3) I will be sharing more of what I am reading with you, merged with my own developing thoughts and growth.  

Never fear. My triumphs and tribulations as a doctoral student with many hats will remain a focus; they intersect everything I do and think right now and therefore cannot be abandoned.

(...mostly tribulations now days.  It will be interesting to see when a shift from tribulations to triumphs occurs- it will happen, right?!?!?!)


*************************************

So why "Analysis Paralysis"?

I am reading my first class text, The Policy Making Process (3rd ed), by Lindblom, C.E. and Woodhouse, E.J. (1993) and that phrase, cliche as it is, keeps entering my mind.  The text examines policy making as a non-linear process; focusing on the power relationships of business elites and constrained public ideas among other things.  It is providing me much thought.  I am only half way through, but am drawn in.  Right now it's making me think mostly of the limited, or constrained, role research and analysis truly has on policy; both it's development and implementation.  This is something I've thought a lot about in my recent past, so to have a book dedicated to the discussion is proving provocative for me.  I am tempted to go back to Fiske's (1993), Power Plays Power Works, for a deeper understanding of power relations; especially the role of understanding the power that comes into play through/within/outside of one's locale, or community.  I think the two texts could work together quite intriguingly well.  I'll keep you posted on my thinking along these lines.

Anybody have any thoughts to add?????

You know how I LOVE comments!

Until then, good night.