LRE re-examined: Misinterpretations and unintended consequences

International Journal of Inclusive Education

Volumn 15, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 1031-1045

  Hyatta, Keith J ^a   Fillerb, John ^b  

^a WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

continuum of alternative placements; inclusion; individualised education programme; Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; least restrictive environment; special education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856924071     PISSN: 13603116     EISSN: 14645173     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2010.484509     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities; Final Rule, 32 C.F.R. Parts 300 and 301 (2006).
2. A.W. v. Northeast R-1 School District, 813 F.2d 158 (8th Cir. [1987]).
3. Baird, M.J. 2006. The LRE continuum: Appropriate placement decisions under the IDEA and NCLB. Palm Beach Gardens, FL: LRP.
4. Biklen, D. 1982. The least restrictive environment: Its application to education. Child and Youth Services 5: 121-44.
5. Blatt, B., and F. Kaplan. 1966. Christmas in purgatory: A photographic essay on mental retardation. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
6. Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 US 176, 102 S. Ct. 3034, 73 L. Ed. 2d 690 (1982).
7. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 US 483 (1954).
8. Daniel, R.R. v. State Board of Education, 874 F.2nd 1036 (5th Cir. [1989]).
9. Danile, P.T.K. 1997. Educating students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment: A slippery slope for educators. Journal of Educational Administration 35: 397-410.
10. Deno, E. 1970. Special education as developmental capital. Exceptional Children 37: 229-37.
11. Education for All Handicapped Children Act, 20 USC, 89 Stat. 773 (1975).
12. Espino v. Besterio, 520 F. Supp. 905 (S.D. Tex. [1981]).
13. Evangelista, A.D. 1998. Full inclusion and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: A clear and convincing standard for cases involving the least restrictive environment provision. National Italian American Bar Association Journal 6: 45-70.
14. Filler, J. 1996. A comment on inclusion: Research and social policy. Society for Research in Child Development Social Policy Report 10, nos. 2-3: 31-3.
15. Filler, J., and Y. Xu. 2006. Including children with disabilities in early childhood education programs: Individualizing developmentally appropriate practices. Childhood Education 83: 92-8.
16. Fischer, L., D. Schimmel, and L.R. Stellman. 2007. Teachers and the law. 7th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
17. Fuchs, D., and L.S. Fuchs. 1994. Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children 60: 294-309.
18. Hamre-Nietupski, S., and J. Nietupski. 2008. Integral involvement of severely handicapped students within regular public schools. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities 33, no. 3: 157-65.
19. Heward, W.L. 2006. Exceptional children: An introduction to special education. 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
20. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 USC 1400 et seq. (2004).
21. Kauffman, J.M. 1995. Why must we celebrate a diversity of restrictive environments? Learning Disabilities and Practice 10: 225-32.
22. Kauffman, J.M., and D.P. Hallahan. 2005a. The illusion of full inclusion: A comprehensive critique of a current special education bandwagon. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
23. Kauffman, J.M., and D.P. Hallahan. 2005b. Special education: What is it and why we need it? Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
24. Kauffman, J.M., and J. Krouse. 1981. The cult of educability: Searching for the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not seen. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities 1: 53-60.
25. Mills v. District of Columbia Board of Education, 348 F. Supp. 866 (D.D.C. 1972); contempt proceedings, EHLR 551:643 (D.D.C. 1980), (1972).
26. Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District, 995 F.2d 1204 (3rd Cir. [1993]).
27. Osgood, R.L. 2008. The history of special education: A struggle for equality in American public schools. Westport, CN: Praeger.
28. Palley, E. 2006. Challenges of rights-based law: Implementing the least restrictive environment mandate. Journal of Disability Policy Studies 16: 229-35.
29. PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 334 F. Supp. 1257 (E.D. Pa. 1971);
30. Petrou, A., P. Angelides, and J. Leigh. 2009. Beyond the difference: From the margins to inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education 13, no. 5: 439-48.
31. Pierce v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary. 268 US 510 (1925).
32. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256 (1896).
33. Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 Regulations, 34 C.F.R. §104.1 et seq.
34. Renollett by Renollett v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 11, Anoka-Hennepin, 42 IDELR 201 (D. Minn. 2005), aff'd. 45 IDELR 117 (8th Cir. [2006]).
35. Reynolds, M. 1962. A framework for considering some issues in special education. Exceptional Children 28: 367-70.
36. Rivera, G. 1972. Willowbrook: A report on how it is and why it doesn't have to be that way. New York: Vintage Books.
37. Roncker v. Walter, 700 F. 2nd 1058 (6th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 US 864, 104 S. Ct. 196, 78 L. Ed. 2d 171 (1983).
38. Rothstein, L.F. 2000. Special education law. 3rd ed. New York: Longman.
39. Sacramento City School District v. Rachel H., 14 F.3d 1398 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied sub nom.,
40. Sacramento City Unified School Dist. v. Holland, 114 S. Ct. 2679 (1994).
41. Sailor, W., J.L. Anderson, A.T. Halvorsen, K. Doering, J. Filler, and L. Goetz. 1989. The comprehensive local school: Regular education for all students with disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
42. San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez, 411 US 1 (1973).
43. Taylor, S.J. 1988. Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the least restrictive environment. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 13: 45-53.
44. Taylor, S.J. 2001. The continuum and current controversies in the USA. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability 26: 15-33.
45. Thomas, S.B., and M.J.K. Rapport. 1998. Least restrictive environment: Understanding the direction of the courts. Journal of Special Education 32: 66-78.
46. Thomazet, S. 2009. From integration to inclusive education: Does changing the terms improve practice? International Journal of Inclusive Education 13, no. 6: 553-63.
47. Timothy, W. v. Rochester School Dist., 559 EHLR 480 (D.N.H. 1988) (875 F.2d 954 (1st Cir. 1989) cert. denied, 493 US 983, (1989).
48. Turnbull, A.P. 2006. Exceptional lives: Special education in today's schools. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
49. Turnbull, H.R.I., M.J. Stowe, and N.E. Huerta. 2007. Free appropriate public education: The law and children with disabilities. 7th ed. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
50. Turnbull, H.R.I., and A.P. Turnbull. 1998. Free appropriate public education. 5th ed. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
51. Villa, R.A., and J.S. Thousand. 2003. Making inclusive education work. Educational Leadership 61: 19-23.
52. Wyatt v. Stickney, 344 F. Supp. 373; 1972 US Dist. LEXIS 14201 (United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Nothern Division 1972).
53. Yell, M.L. 1995. Least restrictive environment, inclusion and students with disabilities: A legal analysis. Journal of Special Education 28: 389-404.
54. Yell, M.L. 1998. The legal basis of inclusion. Educational Leadership 56: 70-3.
55. Yell, M.L. 2006. The law and special education. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.