Students with significant disabilities continue to be among the most segregated in schools. In this article, we argue that the principles of least restrictive environment and involvement and progress in the general curriculum have been interpreted in ways that perpetuate segregation, rather than increasing students' access to meaningful curriculum in inclusive educational contexts. We examine this issue from three broad perspectives: federal policy related to least restrictive environment, interpretations of policies related to involvement and progress in the general curriculum, and the implementation of policies related to assessment of grade-level standards. We discuss implications of each of these issues for providing and increasing involvement and progress in general education contexts and content.

Faculty from four disciplines at a small Liberal Arts College in an American Midwestern city collaborated on an interdisciplinary pre-service project. Students in nursing, physical therapy, social work and special education voluntarily participated in one of two group methods of teaching. The purpose of this study was to examine whether students learn interprofessional teaming more effectively from (i) discussion of research, faculty modeling and role-playing, or from (ii) discussion of research and role-playing. Results from the evaluation suggested both groups benefited from discussions and role-playing related to interprofessional team meetings. A significant difference between students who observed faculty modeling and those who did not was found. The paper discusses the importance of preparing college students for interprofessional collaboration in light of current research.

The least restrictive environment (LRE) mandate of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act has long been questioned as to whether it has fulfilled the original intent of the law. This advocacy brief provides an updated analysis of the flaws underlying the principle of LRE, a mandate that exists at the nexus of cultural beliefs about disability, the influence of the medical model on special education, and the misguided link between intensity of services and more restrictive environments. We review the origins of LRE; summarize research on the positive relationship between placement in general education and student outcomes; describe six flaws of LRE's grounding in the continuum model of educational placement that sanctions segregation; present data that illustrate little progress over time towards general education placement for students with intellectual disability, and outline some key court rulings about what constitutes the least restrictive environment. In summary, we suggest that segregation of students with intellectual disability results as much from the flawed underpinnings of the LRE principle itself as on the attitudes and practices of those who use LRE as a justification for segregation.

No abstract

All parents of eligible students with disabilities have the right to collaborate as equal members of educational teams developing their children's Individualized Education Programs (IEP). However, culturally and linguistically diverse families typically experience barriers to collaboration with school professionals. In this paper, we describe findings from four focus group interviews with Chinese, Vietnamese, and Haitian immigrants examining their participation and language access in their children's IEP meetings, as well as their perspectives on what would improve their IEP meetings. Findings revealed that meaningful engagement was hampered by families' limited access to information, educators' lack of accountability, and limited opportunities for families to develop as advocates. Implications of the research addressing the within-meeting and between-meeting barriers are discussed.