Education in the United States is a right not a privilege

1.) “Education in the United States is a right not a privilege.” This statement remains factual to everyone since it is a defined right. It is an assurance that every citizen is entitled to acquire education for him/her self. Public education in America is one of the functions of the government from its federal, state, and local levels through the Department of Education. Thus, this right is constitutional. By this reason alone, each state must provide an education system in which children regardless of societal status may receive. The presence of the Equal Education Opportunities Act of 1974 serves as an evidence that everybody is entitle for the right of education. The said act states that “no state shall deny equal educational opportunity to an individual on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin” (Cornell Law University Website, 2005). Because it is constitutional in basis, public schools must educate all children. In connection to private schools, the state possess the power to regulate private education but it is limited due to some restrictions to public funding and because the majority of public educational institutions are religious in nature. Public schools must not accept all children with disabilities for the sole reason that such children are to be placed into special education attention. The Individual with Disabilities Education Act provides this right. However, there are still imperative factors to be considered before putting children with disabilities in public schools among these are the kind and extent of their disabilities or medical, psychological, and parental conditions. Up to the present, arguments and debates have been raised in line with the right policies on how to educate children with special educational needs.

2.) Labeling varies and the debates on this subject are highly controversial. But then again, it varies when considered in certain circumstances. The issue of segregation on the aspect of labeling comes at hand. Jenkinson (1997) claims children with disabilities are traditionally educated in segregated classrooms, specifically designed to cater the students’ certain incapacities. In an article written by Dunn (1968), the segregation of special children involves many issues of concern, which were generalized into four main points of argument including the students’ academic achievement, the detrimental effects of labeling associated with placement outside the mainstream, the racial imbalance in special education, and recent advances in individually paced curricula which would make it possible to accommodate students with disabilities in the regular class.

Generally, the practices of labeling to children with special needs are unfavorable to the views of self and self-esteem (McDermitt, 1993). Social stigma is also reinforced by labeling and equated as a result of segregation (Crockett & Kauffman, 1999). On the other hand, labeling is at advantage when directly used towards the betterment of the special attention given to the needs of the children. For instance, when children are labeled as ‘disable’, the needs are defined appropriately and given much opportunities required by the federal government for him/her. The uses of labels both help and hinder the education of children with exceptionalities in terms of educational practice. However, the roles of the parents and teachers should simultaneously play and directly associated for the benefit of the children especially the ones who needed a great deal of attention.

3. The U.S. Congress passed a law that caters to the suitable and free education of children with disabilities in 1975 and was embodied in the Public Law 94-142 or the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Shapiro, 2000). Now, it was renamed as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The U.S. Department of Education states that IDEA supports the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and helps in ensuring equity, accountability and excellence in education for children with disabilities. This act is the nation’s legislation that focuses on the welfare of infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities. Shapiro (2000) named six major provisions that tackle to the special education needs of disabled children. Among these are: a) Zero Reject; b) Nondiscriminatory Evaluation; c) Individualized Education Program (IEP); d) Parent and Student Participation; e) Least Restrictive Environment; and f) Due process.

a. Zero Reject entails that no child may be denied to access a free and appropriate education (Shapiro, 2000).

b. The Nondiscriminatory Evaluation refers to the assessment of disabled children and conducted by multidisciplinary team. It is free from cultural bias and not administered individually (Shapiro, 2000).

c. The Individualized Education Program (IEP) is the blueprint of the educational program granted to the child. It ensures the needs of the child ranging from documentations on current level of educational performance, goals and objectives (short-term, annual, etc.), and other special education related activities such as counseling (Shapiro, 2000).

d. The recognition of the parent and student participation in this act means total involvement of the both in order to receive appropriate opportunities with regards to the educational program (Huefner & Suchey, 1998; Shapiro, 2000).

e. The Least Restrictive Environment implies that the learning placement of children classified as handicapped will take place to the maximum extent possible with children who are not handicapped. Thus, the removal of handicapped children to special classes and separate facilities should take place only when circumstances on the nature or severity of the disability obstructs the child from successfully being educated with the use of supplementary aids and services in regular classes (Crockett & Kauffman, 1999; Shapiro, 2000).

f. Due process guarantees the objectivity in the educational decision-making of both parents and professionals or the school (Huefner & Suchey, 1998; Shapiro, 2000).

Further, the IDEA is different to the Americans with Disabilities Act when it comes to its concentration. The IDEA is focused exclusively on the educational needs of disabled children (Bradley, Katsiyannis, & Yell, 2001; Shapiro, 2000) while the ADA is an all encompassing law that provides full civil rights of people with disabilities against discrimination in employment, state and municipal government, public accommodations, transportation, telecommunications, and a range of other arenas (Fink, 2000; O’brien, 2004). However, it can be assumed that the IDEA is a more comprehensive and specific segment of the ADA in terms of educational needs. Yet, the both legislations aim to care the welfare on the handicapped people and to eventually end discrimination.

4. Children from culturally and linguistically different backgrounds are overrepresented in classes for children with disabilities and underrepresented in classes for children who are gifted and talented because of some developmental considerations such as the emotional and intelligence quotients (Crockett & Kauffman, 1999). Thus, this is used in determining special classes. To reverse this trend, a chosen solution might be inclusive learning. An inclusive education dishing up all students might best convene the needs of all (Johnson, 1999). Inclusion lessens discrimination on disabled children and it fosters sense of belongingness. Although, “there is general agreement that the effort to improve education for students with disabilities must be achieved within a wider effort to enhance education for all students” (Kochhar & West, 1996) and as well as children who are tagged as ‘normal’, the efficiency of inclusive education relies ultimately on instructional variables specifically teachers that must show instructional flexibility and competence. And with the appropriate implementation of IDEA, it will work even better.

References

Cornell Law University Website (2005). Education law: an overview. Retrieved

January 16, 2006 from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Education#education_law:_an_overview.

Bradley, R., Katsiyannis, A., & Yell, M.L. (2001). Reflections on the 25th

Anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Remedial and Special Education. 22(6). 324+.

Crockett, J. & Kauffman, K.M. (1999). The Least Restrictive Environment: Its

Origin and Interpretations in Special Education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dunn, L M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded: Is much of it

justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35, 5-22.

Fink, D.B. (2000). Making a Place for Kids with Disabilities. Westport, CT.:

Praeger. 6.

Huefner, D.S. & Suchey, N. (1998). The State Complaint Procedure under the

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Exceptional Children. 64(4). 529+.

Jenkinson, J.C. (1997) Mainstream or Special? Educating Students with

Disabilities. London: Routledge.

Johnson, G. (1999). Inclusive Education: Fundamental Instructional

Strategies and Considerations. Preventing School Failure. January 1,

1999.

Kochhar, C. A., and West, L. L. (1996). Handbook for Successful Inclusion.

Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.

McDermitt, R. (1993). The acquisition of a child by a learning disability. In S.

Chaikin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. 269-305.

O’brien, R. ed. (2004). Voices from the Edge: Narratives about the Americans

with Disabilities Act. New York: Oxford University Press. 11.

Shapiro, A. (2000). Everybody Belongs: Changing Negative Attitudes toward

Classmates with Disabilities. New York: Routledge Falmer. 261-62.

U.S. Department of Education (2005). IDEA 2004 resources. Retrieved January

16, 2006 from http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/idea2004.html.