Helping SPED Students by Increasing Their Class Sizes?

Full Inclusion or Full Immersion? (Image from Flickr, by Gui Seiz)

One of the latest trends in Special Education is “Full Inclusion.” The idea is that all students benefit from being in the “least restrictive” environment. Special day classes (SDC)—where many special needs students were traditionally exposed to much of their curriculum—segregated them from the general student population and relied on special education (SPED) teachers who were not necessarily credentialed in the subjects which they were teaching.

Many schools are now placing these same students in regular education classes (e.g., science, English, social studies, math). In California, this means they are sometimes in classes with 35-38 students. In the past, most SDC students would have been in small classes of 7-14 students, with a SPED teacher and another 1-3 paraprofessional aides to assist them. Thus, SDC students had very low student to adult ratios ranging from 2:1 to 15:1.

While I don’t wish to argue the merits of full inclusion in this piece, I think it should be obvious to most observers that this is a bastardization of the spirit and goals of the program. Throwing 3-5 SDC students into a class of this size, especially without any aids to assist them, is like throwing a beginning swimmer out of a boat without a life jacket. These are students who generally require additional support. They are often reading far below grade level and may have a range of disabilities that challenge their abilities to access the content.

With budget cuts plaguing school districts throughout the nation, schools are looking for any sort of trick that saves them money. Increasing student to teacher ratios is one way of doing this. More students per teacher means fewer teachers need to be on the payroll. Mainstreaming SPED students without providing paraprofessionals or other aides to assist them also saves districts money.

Feds Rip Off Special Needs Kids

Feds Rip Off Special Needs Kids

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Feds have avoided paying their obligation to states to provide supplemental services for students with special needs. In 2008, for example, the federal government owed states $19 billion, but only paid out $10 billion.

In these challenging economic times, with so many districts facing budget and service cuts, and the federal government handing out trillions to Wall Street bankers and defense contractors, it is particularly disgusting to be short changing kids with disabilities. IDEA serves millions of children nationally. In California, districts are being asked to “push in” special needs students to regular ed classes to the fullest extent possible, creating an even greater need for funding to hire paraprofessionals and support staff. Under NCLB, special education teachers are being asked to become “highly qualified” in all subjects they teach which, at the high school level, may require some teachers to get credentialed in math, English, social studies and at least one science discipline. This also will require additional funding.

“Each year they ask us to do more, while providing us with less. Eventually they will ask us to do everything, and give us nothing. I think this might be that time.”—quote by a former colleague.