Comparing Special Education: Origins to Contemporary Paradoxes

Education Sciences, 2020

Over the past decade, ever since the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UN-CRPD) in Germany, a morally charged debate has taken place about inclusive and special education. Special schools are under considerable attack and even special education is deemed responsible for the difficulties in implementing full inclusion in schools. The gravest accusation is that special education and special schools are even today a close connection to the Nazi era between 1933 and 1945, when children with disabilities were sterilized and murdered. Special education is seen as a symbol and guarantor of separation and exclusion and therefore incompatible with the idea of inclusion. This article will outline and analyze this claim and present other more compelling reasons why full inclusion has been difficult to implement in Germany. Following the analysis, we will describe a possible way forward for inclusion and special education.

2015

Over the twentieth century, a growing group of students has been transferred into considerably expanded special education systems. These programs serve children with diagnosed impairments and disabilities and students with a variety of learning difficulties. Children and youth “with special educational needs ” constitute a heterogeneous group with social, ethnic, linguistic, and physical disadvantages. An increasingly large percentage of those students at risk of leaving school without credentials participate in special education, a highly legitimated low status (and stigmatizing) school form. While most countries commit themselves to school integration or inclusive education to replace segregated schools and separate classes, cross-national and regional comparisons of special education’s diverse student bodies show considerable disparities in their (1) rates of classification, (2) provided learning opportunities, and (3) educational attainments. Analyzing special education demograp...

WZB Discussion Paper, 2010

Exceptionality, 2020

Social policies can be well-intentioned but ineffective in achieving what is intended. They can be undermined or destroyed by their exaggerated or oversimplified caricatures with a single, narrow focus. Caricatures may result in the opposite of the original intent of more carefully crafted variants. Institutionalization and deinstitutionalization are used as examples of a full cycle of policy failure. The shift from mandatory special education to the full inclusion movement (FIM) internationally is noted. Nowadays, the FIM maintains a narrow focus on one aspect of the U. S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), with a deeply erroneous interpretation of the least restrictive environment (LRE) requirement. In giving comparatively little attention to other parts of the U. S. law, including free appropriate public education (FAPE), the individual education plan (IEP), and a continuum of alternative placements (CAP), the FIM may become a caricature; emphasizing physical/spatial inclusion to the neglect of FAPE and learning, it may achieve the opposite of what was intended. Not accidentally, IDEA has been criticized as outdated, and it could be revised detrimentally if such criticism, accompanied by alarming international policy trends, dominate thinking about special education. Recommendations are made for learning from the history of social policy, including the institutionalization/deinstitutionalization movements. The purpose of this essay is to review how well-intentioned social policy regarding anything, including special education, can go awry. Consideration of such policies is particularly important in the context of today's worldwide movement toward the extreme of full inclusion in education

Disability & Society, 2007

During the past two decades there has been a push by parents and advocacy groups in special education to expand the practice of inclusion or adopt full inclusion. Proponents argue that this will allow students with disabilities to receive greater social benefits, it will reduce stigmatisms associated with disabilities, and that segregation of any kind is a violation of the civil rights of students with disabilities. In contrast, critics believe that full inclusion or inappropriate inclusion practices are academically inefficient for both students with and without disabilities, cause undue stress on local educational systems, and can actually have a negative impact on the goals and aspirations of special education. The history of special education has long been one of discrimination, segregation and exclusion. This paper first looks at the history and rise of inclusion in special education. It also aims to look at the debate of inclusion in special education by examining it in terms of equity, reducing stereotypes, and effectiveness. The goal is to provide an analysis that highlights the need for balance in this policy so that it can thrive in appropriate conditions for all students.

In: Disability & Society, 2011

School segregation continues to be understood as legitimate in Germany. To explain why, we chart the development of the learning disability discourse and the special education profession, providing insights into the ongoing expansion of segregated special schooling. The discourse analysis of articles published between 1908 and 2004 in the special education professional association journal, Zeitschrift für Heilpädagogik, uncovers the knowledge base of special education that led to the rise of its main category, ‘learning disability,’ and school type, the support school (then: Hilfsschule, now: Förderschule). Despite critical junctures over the twentieth century, special education’s dominant discourse and school structures exhibit remarkable continuity. We find professional authority with respect to ‘learning disability’ is a key factor in the persistence and continued growth of segregated special education. Scientific discourse continues to legitimate the classification of pupils as ‘learning disabled’ and their subsequent allocation to segregated schools.

Center for European studies.(Program for the …, 1994

Over the twentieth century, a growing group of students has been transferred into considerably expanded special education systems. These programs serve children with diagnosed impairments and disabilities and students with a variety of learning difficulties. Children and youth "with special educational needs" constitute a heterogeneous group with social, ethnic, linguistic, and physical disadvantages. An increasingly large percentage of those students at risk of leaving school without credentials participate in special education, a highly legitimated low status (and stigmatizing) school form. While most countries commit themselves to school integration or inclusive education to replace segregated schools and separate classes, cross-national and regional comparisons of special education's diverse student bodies show considerable disparities in their (1) rates of classification, (2) provided learning opportunities, and (3) educational attainments. Analyzing special education demographics and organizational structures indicates which children and youth are most likely to grow up less educated and how educational systems distribute educational success and failure. Findings from a German-American comparison show that which students bear the greatest risk of becoming less educated depends largely on definitions of "special educational needs" and the institutionalization of special education systems.

Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan Luar Biasa

Special education is defined as programs that cater to children with disabilities, giftedness, and talents separately from their same-age peers. Globally, there is an increasing awareness about social inclusion which led to promoting and aiming for inclusive education for all children. This study aims to review the literature regarding the progress of special education policies in countries from various regions. Also, it seeks to answer the question, “Where do countries from different regions’ policies in special education are comparable?”. This literature review used a qualitative approach and employed thematic analysis to analyze a qualitative dataset. There are four (4) themes that emerge from the data analysis namely 1) Progress on Special Education Policies; 2) Objectives in Achieving Inclusion; 3) Inclusion as a Solution and 4) Barriers to Inclusive Education. The study suggests that various countries are recognizing inclusive education as a better way to address the needs of ...

Comparative Education Review, 2009