An excerpt from “The Politics of Education K-12”
The Rise of Special Education as an Industry
Shortly after the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was implemented, public schools across the United States experienced a significant increase in special education services. Principals and teachers, seeking to serve severely disabled students, formed consortiums to create specialized programs, including support services like occupational and physical therapy, as well as counseling.
However, the growth of special education budgets has gradually squeezed out resources needed by other students—those who need extra challenges and those who need extra help but lack the “learning disability” label.
The Expansion of the “Learning Disability” Label
The late 1970s saw a new category under PL 94-142: “learning disabled.” Over time, this label began to include students simply performing below expected academic levels. For instance, while a fourth grader reading at a fourth-grade level was average, a learning-disabled student might be reading at a second-grade level, leading to special education classification.
Once this label was applied, the consequences rippled through classrooms, affecting expectations and educational practices across public schools.
How Labeling Impacts Classrooms
Teachers, faced with students who struggled academically or behaviorally, found it easier to recommend these students for special education testing. If the tests confirmed the student was behind, they were moved to separate classrooms, often with less rigorous expectations and materials.
Even when students did not fully qualify for special education, teachers would encourage parents to request services, believing this was the only way to provide their child with needed help.
Consequences for Students and Teachers
Students with the “learning disability” label often face lower expectations, simplified curricula, and alternative testing conditions. While some receive assistance through pull-out programs, others experience the “push-in” model, where special education teachers support them in the general classroom.
Unfortunately, many special education teachers lack the extensive content training required for higher-level math, science, and reading instruction, leaving them overwhelmed. This often leads to insufficient support for students and frustration among teachers who feel overburdened.
The Broader Impact on Public Education
This system has created a powerful, self-perpetuating structure within public schools, consuming significant resources while failing to deliver measurable improvements in student outcomes. The expansion of special education services, while well-intentioned, has become one of the many anchors slowing down public education in the United States.
Programs like Response to Intervention (RTI) have attempted to address these issues by ensuring special education is a last resort, but change is slow, and the entrenched system remains a significant challenge.
Moving Forward
In The Politics of Education K-12, I argue that we must critically examine how the “learning disability” label and special education practices impact public schools. If we truly want to help students, we need to ensure our resources are directed toward strategies that improve outcomes rather than maintaining systems that institutionalize low expectations.
📘 Ready to explore solutions for improving education?
Buy The Politics of Education K-12 here to learn more.
Related Reading
References
- Allan G. Osborne Jr., Ed.D., Charles J. Russo, J.D., Ed.D., “Attorney Fees, School Boards, and Special Education,” School Business Affairs, June 2010. Read here
- Gordon Donaldson, “The Big Squeeze: Paying for Special Education Services,” UMaine News, 2016. Read here
- Jose L. Martin, “Legal Implications of RTI and Special Education Identification,” RTI Action Network, 2016. Read here