This study compared the peer acceptance of main-streamed elementary school students with that of their class peers of differing ability levels. In each classroom, a mainstreamed student and a student of low, average, and high ability, defined in terms of reading-group placement, were selected randomly. To assess peer acceptance, a sociometric scale was group-administered to each of the participating 100 classes while the mainstreamed student was present. ANOVA indicated that the main effect due to ability level was significant. The Scheffe test revealed that peer acceptance was significantly lower for the mainstreamed student as compared with both the average- and the high-ability student. However, the mainstreamed and low-ability students were not significantly different from each other, nor were the average- and high-ability students.

The current movement to integrate special students into the regular classroom is receiving increasing attention in the literature. reflecting the interest of researchers and educators alike. Deno (1973) points out that this movement does not indicate that students in regular classes exhibit greater achievement but rather has resulted from a lack of evidence to support the more costly special class concept. Numerous educational models have been proposed to facilitate mainstreaming, e.g.. revised teacher education programs, school reorganiza- Teacher Attitudes towardtion, various types of resource rooms. Handicapped ChildrenAffleck, Lehning. and Brow (1973) have and Regular Class Integration cautioned that currently special educators seem to be embracing the resource STEFAN J. HARASYMIW, PhD. room idea with as little evaluative evi- North western Universitydence to support this change as was done in the case of the earlier selfcontained classroom concept.

~Mainstreaming" legdation requires that special needs students participate in regular classroom activities to the extent possible. Studies indicate, however, that neither parents, peers, nor professionals may be e cted to hold positive attitudes toward these students or be rompetent rovizm of positive growth experiences. Existing evidence supports the n J f o r comprehensive training programs for these groups which provide an intarface between their experiences with special needs students and an introduction to new knowledge. School psychologkta should assume R leadership role in development and implement at ion.The passage of P. L. 93-380 and Y. L. 94-142 and the subsequent implementation of state mandates for the appropriate education of all handicapped children necessitate concern for the degree to which professionals are competent to deal with these children. This legislation requires a comprehensive evaluation to determine individual student goals and objectives and a resulting educational placement in accordance with the "least restrictive alternative" concept. That is, the educational plan must allow for student participation within the mainstream to the extent possible. Not specified are, for example, the particular measures or procedures to he used in the evaluation, which remain a.t the discretion of local committees, as does selection of appropriate educational settings. Thus, decisions may be altered by the value judgments or idiosyncratic interpretations of team members.