Orthopedically Handicapped Children in Ohio Public Schools

1967

A definition of learning disorders, medical observations, diagnostic terms, the role of medication, and psychological implications and descriptions are provided. The philosophy and variations of educational programs for the neurologically handicapped are described; facets of the special class program considered are the instructional program, diagnostic teaching, the relationship between basic skill instruction and developmental area activities, self concept, behavior management, room organization, parent role, and medical attention. A guide for administrators summarizes relevant state board of education program standards. Appendixes list references, state board standards for services, instruction, and special classes, and provide application forms, a sample letter to a physician, and sample behavioral and academic diagnostic charts.

1990

The third of five volumes of a study of instructional programs for handicapped children and youth in separate day care and residential facilities, this document presents the results of an analysis of State education agency (SEA) procedures and the impact of these procedures on special education services and practices within the targeted facilities. The analysis draws upon a variety of sources, including case studies of e'ght states (California, Connecticut, Floride, Illinois, Loutdiana, New Jersey, Ohio and South Cerolina), a survey of 30 SEA special education divisions, a survey of 1,941 separate facilities, and case studies of 24 separate facilities from the case study states. Part 1 of the report focuses on the economic and educational context and the strue-ure of state special education systems. Part 2 deals with SEA procedures for special education funding, standards, monitoring, technical assistance, in-service training, program development, and dissemination activities. Part 3 discusses factors affecting educational practice at separate facilities, specifically: changes in student population and mission; factors affecting programs, such as individualized education and transition plans, changes in life skills and vocational education, increased use of treatment and behavioral goals in educational programming, and program evaluation; factors affecting facility staffing, such as staff development and staff evaluation; and factors affecting student integration and parental involvement. Three technical appendices review the study methodology, And 15 references are included. (JDD) US. DEMRTMENT OF EDUCAIION Office <A Educational Ropeatch and lancoomment EDU9AIIONM. RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 're Tem document has biers rftwoducee es received trom th parson Or OrganKabOft originating a O Mnor champs nava twin made to Immo reprOduCtion WSW/ Points ot view or oons stated due dank mint do not rimestanly OERl domain or OCMOY \ 6 M. Special Education'System and the Placement of Students with Handicaps Across the States

1981

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made 17 from the original document.' .

1990

The third of five volumes of a study of instructional programs for handicapped children and youth in separate day care and residential facilities, this document presents the results of an analysis of State education agency (SEA) procedures and the impact of these procedures on special education services and practices within the targeted facilities. The analysis draws upon a variety of sources, including case studies of e'ght states (California, Connecticut, Floride, Illinois, Loutdiana, New Jersey, Ohio and South Cerolina), a survey of 30 SEA special education divisions, a survey of 1,941 separate facilities, and case studies of 24 separate facilities from the case study states. Part 1 of the report focuses on the economic and educational context and the strue-ure of state special education systems. Part 2 deals with SEA procedures for special education funding, standards, monitoring, technical assistance, in-service training, program development, and dissemination activities. Part 3 discusses factors affecting educational practice at separate facilities, specifically: changes in student population and mission; factors affecting programs, such as individualized education and transition plans, changes in life skills and vocational education, increased use of treatment and behavioral goals in educational programming, and program evaluation; factors affecting facility staffing, such as staff development and staff evaluation; and factors affecting student integration and parental involvement. Three technical appendices review the study methodology, And 15 references are included. (JDD) US. DEMRTMENT OF EDUCAIION Office <A Educational Ropeatch and lancoomment EDU9AIIONM. RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 're Tem document has biers rftwoducee es received trom th parson Or OrganKabOft originating a O Mnor champs nava twin made to Immo reprOduCtion WSW/ Points ot view or oons stated due dank mint do not rimestanly OERl domain or OCMOY \ 6 M. Special Education'System and the Placement of Students with Handicaps Across the States

American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 1992

2016

CONTRACT 300-78-0461 NOTE 80p.; The document was also prepared by the

Indiana Magazine of History, 2002

In 1931 the Indiana state legislature passed a law requiring all public school districts in the state to ascertain the "number of problem children and children three or more years retarded in mental development who are in attendance.. . ." The districts were then to "establish special classes or courses to give such children instruction adapted to their needs and mental attainments" if the number of such children in the district exceeded twenty-five. Together with a 1927

Remedial and Special Education, 1998

c children and youth with disabilities have historically received unequal treatment in the public education system. In the early 20th century, the enactment of compulsory attendance laws in the states began to change the educational opportunities for these students. Opportunities for admittance to public schools were greater, but many students nevertheless did not receive an effective or appropriate education. Beginning in the late 1960s and early 1970s, parents and advocates for students with disabilities began to use the courts in an attempt to force states to provide an equal educational opportunity for these students. These efforts were very successful and eventually led to the passage of federal legislation to ensure these rights. The purpose of this article is to examine the legal history of special education. We will examine these early efforts to ensure a free appropriate education for students with disabilities up to and including the enactment of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997.

1975

Described and evaluated is Ohio's Special Education Regional Resource Center Network. Discussed are background information, funding structure and goals of the two major components (Program Planning and Development Centers and Instructional Resource Centers) as well as such other components as research and development projects. Reported is a 1974 Instructional Resource Center evaluation which consisted of a mail survey of 695 special educators' awareness and use of the Centers and in reactions from site visits. The evaluation includes the following findings: the centers were valued by all special educators surveyed, materials borrowing and training assistance were ranked as the most helpful services, and priority in future services was assigned to installing a computer terminal at the school to receive educational prescriptions for individual children. Appended are the seven service areas found in the mail survey and a list cf site visitors. (CL)

California Law Review, 1974

2. N.Y. STATE COMI'N, REPORT ON THE QUALMTY, COST AND FINANCING OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDuc. 9B.2 (1972). The spread in the figures is almost wholly accounted for by disparities in estimating the percentage of brain-injured and learning-disabled children. 3. See generally Kirk, Research in Education, in MENTAL RETARDATION 57 (H. Stevens & R. Heber eds. 1964). 4. See E. RuBIN, C. SImsoN & M. BETWEE, EMOTIONALLY HANDICAPPED CaL-DREN AND TiE ELEmENTARY SCHOOL 3132, 3134 (1966). See also Dunn, Special Education for the Mildly Retarded: Is Much of It Justifiable?, in PROBLEMS AND IssuEs IN THE EDUCATION OF EXCEPTIONAL CmLDREN 382 (R. Jones ed. 1971). 5. Compare Kramer, Diagnosis and Classification: Their Purposes and Uses in Epidemiological and Health Services Research with Meyer, Screening and Assessment of Young Children at Developmental Risk (1973) (reports prepared for the Project on the Classification of Exceptional Children, Vanderbilt University). 6. Among the categories of exceptionality which are defined by LQ. test score are: borderline, mild, moderate, severe and profound mental retardation. See Brison, 1974] CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW A. Criticisms and Suggested Reforms of Classification Schemes 1. The Severely Handicapped Most severely handicapped children are classified as ineducable and are denied access to publicly supported instruction. But this practice is inconsistent with the research findings that all children are educable, that is, able through instruction to move from relative dependence to relative independence. Many of these children-estimated to number between 450,000 and 4,000,000 7-spend their entire lives in state-run institutions, which, while providing minimal care, lack the resources to undertake any training in self-help. Private schools licensed by the states do train children with specific handicaps. But because these schools are self-supporting, they generally enroll only children from well-to-do homes. While a few states have sought to alleviate this fiscal inequity by providing vouchers for handicapped youngsters, 8 the burden of caring for the severely handicapped falls most heavily upon the poor, the group least able to sacrifice the time and energy needed to ensure adequate educational help. Even when public schools provide some instruction for the severely handicapped, they do not do enough. Autistic children, for example, require costly, highly structured, professionally staffed programs. Placing autistic children in any other type of program is viewed as the functional equivalent of excluding them from school. 9 These criticisms of the education of severely handicapped children view-the public schools as doing nothing, or too little, for this group. The suggested remedy is to create additional special programs or make available additional resources for existing programs for hard-to-educate children. The criticisms provoked by the schools' treatment of the mildly handicapped, however, are quite different. 2. The mildly handicapped Special programs for the mildy handicapped have been faulted for a host of reasons: they misclassify students, enroll a disproportionate Definition, Diagnosis, and Classification, in MENTAL RETAIwATION 10 (A. Baumeister ed. 1967). Other categories are: hearing-impaired, visually handicapped, speechimpaired, physically handicapped, brain-injured (both minimally and severely) and emotionally handicapped.