Special as ineffective. Because of special education’s

Special
Education law has been a major presence in schools for over 40 years, but
recent changes have drastically reshaped federal and state education policies
including the IDEA.  These changes were
solidified in the 2004 IDEA amendments which specifically aligned major aspects
of the legislation with the NCLB.  The
education of students with disabilities today has been shaped two very powerful
laws: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act and the No
Child Left Behind Act.

            In these articles we see that according
to some in the IDEA group, these teams combine information from academic,
cognitive, linguistic, and perceptual tests to identify students’ strengths and
weaknesses and to explore eligibility for Tier 3.  In other words, for the NCLB group, RTI stands
for a reformed service delivery system that emphasizes early intervention and
the unification of general education and special education, which in turn
facilitates adoption of challenging standards and accountability for all.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

      Although neither IDEA nor NCLB group
members offer a detailed, comprehensive vision of special education in an RTI
world, enough has been written to begin to understand important between- group
differences on special education’s role and importance; enough has been said to
be troubled by the vision of each.  For
decades, academics, professional organizations have characterized special
education programs as ineffective.  
            Because of special education’s
misguided emphasis on individualized instruction and individualized education
programs (IEPs), according to McLaughlin, “aggregate performance data
are impossible to obtain, privacy provisions prevent open scrutiny of student
progress or attainment of goals”  McLaughlin
(2006) wrote, “A group of researchers who studied learning disabilities
and reading disorders estimates that schools could reduce the number of
students receiving special or compensatory education by 70% if they instituted
early identification and prevention programs”  The President’s Commission on Excellence in
Special Education wrote that this ineffectiveness is partly due to an historic,
nonevidence- based approach to instruction, exemplified by special education’s
frequent use of aptitude- by-treatment interaction to determine educational
programs.
            Teachers differentiating their
instruction problem solve in the colloquial, or literal, sense by leveraging
knowledge about their students’ experiences, interests, learning styles, and
readiness levels; by conveying information in multiple sensory modalities; by
grouping children flexibly; by adjusting the pace of instruction; and by
assessing learning with varied and balanced measures and procedures.  Teachers used ‘differentiated’ instruction
with the special needs students, meaning different assignments and varied
presentations of the information to best reach each learner.”   As we see
in Heartland’s problem-solving approach, in accordance with behavioral
consultation, a teacher with a difficult-to-teach student meets with the
building assistance team, which helps select, implement, and determine the
effectiveness of an intervention.  In the
absence of control or contrast groups, which may have permitted
cause-and-effect attributions, colleagues reasoned that increasing gains of
successive cohorts would provide a basis for concluding that teachers were
becoming increasingly effective as a function of their experience in the
literacy project.
            I found myself relating more to
Fuchs article, I work with students who struggle with Dyslexia and other reading
problems,  so the response to intention practices
and providing a better Tier I for students with disabilities as well as other
struggling students it will helps address special education eligibility
criteria so that students are appropriately identified.