But that needle can drive a system when where a child receives education is based on it; especially if it is somewhere other than where they would go if they didn't have a disability label attached to their education.
The continuum, as a legal term, is a needle in the haystack with the law being the haystack. The word itself shows up a total of 2 times in the 1975 and current 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act's Regulations (IDEA) and a total of
zero times in the acts themselves (formerly PL 94-142 "Education for All Handicapped Children Act"). Like I said, a needle, or two.
One instance refers to the student's right to a full range, or full continuum, of related services (i.e. speech and language, occupational therapy, vision, transportation, etc...) deemed necessary for them to be able to access a meaningful education (a.k.a. to actually learn, and not just be there).
The other instance refers to a Continuum of Alternative Placements (Section 300.115). This particular language is the title of section header in the regulations. It is also the most commonly referred to by district administrators; at least in my conversations with them.
Just for kicks, look at this: Here you see the 1975 language, taken ver batim from the 1975 EHA Regulations:
Continuum of Alternative Placements-
(a) 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.
(b) The continuum required in paragraph (a) of this section must-
(1) Include the alternative placements listed in the definition of special education under section ___ (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions); and
(2) Make provision for supplementary services (such as a resource room or itinerant instruction) to be provided in conjunction with regular class placement.
AND here you see the 2004 ver batim language...
Continuum of Alternative Placements-
(a) 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.
(b) The continuum required in paragraph (a) of this section must-
(1) Include the alternative placements listed in the definition of special education under section ___ (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions); and
(2) Make provision for supplementary services (such as a resource room or itinerant instruction) to be provided in conjunction with regular class placement.
NOTCIE ANYTHING?
They are exactly the same.
URGH!
If we agree that politics and legislative actions are operationalized public values one might assume, based on the lack of language change alone, that public value around education for individuals with disabilities has remained consistent over the past 35+ years. However, media, pop culture, schooling patterns and overall public language has shifted- does this not represent a public value shift? What then, is the purpose of this legislation?
Beyond the value issue I see here, I hypothesize an additional issue related to the outcome, or the implementation, of the act's dual use of the word continuum in it's regulations: I hypothesize that leaders are confusing a student's "need" for related services with a their "need" for a more restrictive (aka segregated) placement. I think that leaders (and other stakeholders) think, or act based on an assumption, that the more services you need drives where you should be educated. So if you only need a little homework help, or some extra time on tests, the general education environment is your best learning environment (the law calls this your LRE- least restrictive environment). But, if you require a modified curriculum with lower reading levels and occupational and speech services for fine motor and verbal motor skills, then your best learning environment, or LRE, is a segregated classroom or even separate special education school. I further hypothesize that these two separate uses of the word "continuum" (a continuum of related services and a continuum of alternative placements) were NOT meant to be correlated in practice, nor were they meant to drive action of one another. As far as we know today, with our current knowledge base, an individual's service needs and their own best learning environment ARE NOT RELATED. So to me, there is an operational confusion going on as leaders implement IDEA's federal regs.
But.... as I said, this is just my own hypothesis. My "Taking on the Continuum" project is where I test this hypothesis. I'll let you know what I find out.
[By the way, I am not the first to hypothesize this. Taylor, and others, have been saying this since the late 80's- See "Caught in the Continuum" in The Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, volume 13, issue 1, back in 1988 for his take on the issue of the confusion of service needs with a physical education placement (aka the more services a school team deems you need, the more segregated your placement they deem you need).]
That's all for tonight folks. I will eagerly await your thoughts: Some people think I'm crazy, others brave, and yet other's wonder why waste the time?... What do you think?
