The regular education initiative debate: its promises and problems.

The regular education initiative debate: its promises and problems. ABSTRACT: The most intense and controversial issue presentlyreceiving attention in the special education professional literature isthe Regular Education Initiative (REI) debate. The proposed merger ofspecial and regular education into a unitary unitarypertaining to a single object or individual. system has attracted bothstrong advocates and critics. This article examines the currentparameters of this discourse, identifies specific problems and issuesrelated to this debate, and suggests strategies for overcoming perceivedobstacles and improving the overall dialogue. Particular attention isgiven to key groups, for example, local educators and studentsthemselves, who have been largely excluded from the REI debate. Most ofthe suggested benefits of the REI movement will never accrue unless itspresent discourse is expanded to include these groups. Ill As thecurrent debate involving the proposed merger of special education andregular education intensifies, it appears that many special educatorsfeel compelled to choose sides. Either one is for or against what hascommonly become known as the Regular Education initiative (REI), themovement advocating that the general education system assumeunequivocal, primary responsibility for all students in our publicschools-including identified handicapped students as well as thosestudents who have special needs of some type. Thus, most proponents ofthe REI (e.g., Reynolds, Wang, & Walberg, 1987; Sapon-Shevin, 1987a;Stainback & Stainback, 1984; Will, 1986) call for a dissolution ofthe present dual system in our public school structure, to be replacedby a unitary educational system, which, if carefully designed andimplemented, would allow for a more effective and appropriate educationfor all students. In brief, REI advocates argue that the current special educationdelivery system is beset be��set?tr.v. be��set, be��set��ting, be��sets1. To attack from all sides.2. To trouble persistently; harass. See Synonyms at attack.3. with a multitude of problems. They see it asbased on flawed flaw?1?n.1. An imperfection, often concealed, that impairs soundness: a flaw in the crystal that caused it to shatter.See Synonyms at blemish.2. logic, as discriminatory, as programmatically Using programming to accomplish a task. ineffective, and as cost inefficient. Whereas the rallying cry ofspecial education professional and advocacy groups during the 1960s and1970s was "greater access to the mainstream," today it isbeing replaced by a much more complex rallying cry: "full access toa restructured mainstream" Skrtie, 1987a). Advocates argue that "mere access" to the current generaleducation mainstream is not enough. However, because of the deficienciesin organizational structure of general education, along with its presentinability to respond effectively to individual student diversity anddifference, general education requires a major reconstitution if it isto meet the needs of handicapped and other special needs students(Edgar, 1987, 1988; Reynolds et al., 1987; Skrtic, 1987a, 1988). Most writers commonly identified as REI "opponents"(e.g., Gerber, 1988; Hallahan, Keller, McKinney, Lloyd, & Bryan,1988; Keogh, 1988; Mesinger, 1985) generally attempt to qualify theirpositions, claiming not to be necessarily opposed to the merger ofregular and special education per se, but rather advocating a morecautious approach to the issue. Typically they argue that the REImovement is based on some basic false assumptions and that it lacks arigorous research base. These opponents maintain that if the REI isadopted too quickly on a widespread basis, it could bring serious harmto the very students it is designed to help. Despite thesequalifications, the battle lines Battle Lines may refer to: "Battle Lines" (DS9 episode), first season episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Battle Lines (novel), Star Trek: Voyager novel See alsoBattleline Publications Line of battle increasingly are being drawnand-justifiably or not-scholars and researchers are clearly beingidentified as being either for or against the REI. It is not my purpose to pass judgment on or question the motives ofanyone who has offered written or verbal commentary on the REI. Thiswould be both presumptious and nonproductive non��pro��duc��tive?adj.1. Not yielding or producing: nonproductive land.2. Not engaged in the direct production of goods: nonproductive personnel.n. . Yet several criticalfactors in the present REI controversy have not been given sufficientconsideration by most debators. If these issues are not carefullyaddressed, they will only present major obstacles to the development andimplementation of effective educational reform for all students. Passingjudgment would also fan the fires of controversy and divisiveness thatcurrently exist in American education, with the unfortunate butinevitable result that increasingly larger numbers of students will"fall through the cracks" of this very system. SPECIALEDUCATION UNIVERSITY DOMINATION First, despite a few recent exceptions(Gartner & Lipsky, 1987), the REI debate has largely taken placeamong researchers and scholars who are affiliated with special educationdepartments at universities and colleges. Regular educators, for themost part, hive had an extremely limited role in these discussions.Certainly others have recognized this situation and have cited this lackof participation as a major reason that the REI movement is unlikely tobe effective. For example, in one of the most frequently citedreferences, Lieberman (1985) criticized Stainback and Stainback's(1984) call for a merger of regular and special education as similar to"a wedding in which we, as special educators, have forgotten toinvite the bride [regular educators]" (p. 513). Carrying the analogy further, Lieberman (1985) stated: We cannot drag regular educators kicking and screaming into a merger [wedding] with special education. The daily evidence on mainstreaming attitudes is too overwhelming. This proposed merger is a myth, unless regular educators, for reasons far removed from "it's best for children," decide that such a merger is in their own best interests. This is something that we will never be able to point out to them. They will have to come to it in their own way, on their own terms, in their own time. How about a few millenia? (p. 513). Obviously, Lieberman sees little, if any, value in truly examiningthe REI issue, having already concluded a priori a prioriIn epistemology, knowledge that is independent of all particular experiences, as opposed to a posteriori (or empirical) knowledge, which derives from experience. that regular educationpresently is unwilling or unable to change-and that the likelihood ofwitnessing such change (at least in our reasonably expected lifetimes)is remote. Possibly, Liebertman is right. However, this isn't thepoint. To make such an assumption as that of Lieberman's onlyserves to mask the real critical issues and to beg the real questions. If the REI never had surfaced as a labeled, identified issue in thefirst place, I strongly suspect that the role of special educationwithin the overall educational structure presently would still be theobject of vehement debate. Its ever-increasing visibility would havedemanded such. Even its most vocal and severe critics cannot ignore thewidespread impact that the identification, instructional, and placementpractices of special education since the implementation of P.L. 94-142have had on American education-sociologically, politically,economically, and educationally. Therefore, borrowing Lieberman's analogy, I suggest that" the wedding has already taken place. " Formal invitationsmay not have been sent, but this makes no difference. Neither the bridenor the groom may have been willing, enthusiastic participants in theceremony, but this too makes little difference. Although not currentlyformally sanctioned, or even necessarily accepted or desired by eitherparty, the impact of P.L. 94-142 has produced a wedding of sorts.Lieberman and others may have missed it, but unmistakably un��mis��tak��a��ble?adj.Impossible to mistake or misinterpret; obvious: unmistakable signs of illness.un it occurred.Now, the real question is, how do we make this marriage work? Special educators at institutions of higher education (IHES IHES Institut des Hautes ��tudes Scientifiques (Institute of Advanced Research in Mathematics and Theoretical Physics in France)IHES International House Eastern Spain (Barcelona, Spain)) needto stop debating exclusively among themselves. Faculty representingother areas, especially elementary and secondary education, as well aseducational administration, must be brought into the REI debate.Collaborative discussions, presentations, and correspondence betweenspecial and regular educators need to be actively pursued. Vehicles such as the study and research agenda groups organized andfacilitated by The National inquiry into the Future of Education forStudents with Special Needs Skrtic, 1987b) sponsored by the Universityof Kansas The University of Kansas (often referred to as KU or just Kansas) is an institution of higher learning in Lawrence, Kansas. The main campus resides atop Mount Oread. , provide one specific example whereby greater collaborationamong am personnel can be fostered. Study groups or"think-tanks" can be organized at various levels-university,state, regional, local, and national- to address particular issues andconcerns involving at-risk students. Such vehicles have the potential toprovide both scholars and practitioners with valuable opportunities toengage in productive discourse and collaborative problem solving Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) is a behavior management approach developed for children with social, emotional, and behavioral challenges. The CPS approach views behavioral challenges as a form of learning disability and seeks to correct behavior through cognitive intervention. . LACKOF LOCAL INVOLVEMENT The REI debate must include more substantialinvolvement of special and regular educators at the local educationagency (LEA) level. Both proponents and opponents of the greater mergerof regular and special education programs frequently cite issues andconcerns directly involving the roles, responsibilities, attitudes, andskill levels of building principals and teachers as being critical tothe eventual success or failure of REI efforts. Yet, for the most part,these frontline front��linealso front line ?n.1. A front or boundary, especially one between military, political, or ideological positions.2. Basketball See frontcourt.3. Football The linemen of a team. personnel have been passive participants, at best, inthis discourse. It is understandable why so much skepticism and, in some instances,even outright hostility exist at the LEA level relative to the REIissue. Because of the myriad pressures, confusion reigns. The REImovement often is perceived as still another in a long line of top-downpolicy attempts to dictate and control program implementation. Manyregular educators, already feeling overburdened o��ver��bur��den?tr.v. o��ver��bur��dened, o��ver��bur��den��ing, o��ver��bur��dens1. To burden with too much weight; overload.2. To subject to an excessive burden or strain; overtax.n.1. and unfairly criticizedfor their perceived lack of response to more broadly based issues (e.g.,rising illiteracy illiteracy,inability to meet a certain minimum criterion of reading and writing skill.Definition of IlliteracyThe exact nature of the criterion varies, so that illiteracy must be defined in each case before the term can be used in a meaningful , increasing drop-out rates, and declining studentachievement test scores), view increased special education mandates asbeing especially intrusive and unrealistic. Many of them feel mired mire?n.1. An area of wet, soggy, muddy ground; a bog.2. Deep slimy soil or mud.3. A disadvantageous or difficult condition or situation: the mire of poverty.v. and caught in an excellence versusequity" trap (Sapon-Shevin, 1987b; Shepard, 1987; Toch, 1984;Yudof, 1984). They feel public pressure to improve the overall academicperformance levels of their students, but now must also attempt to"accommodate" difficult-to-teach students within theirclasses-which may result in the overall decrease of student achievementscores (Gersten, Walker, & Darch, 1988; Kauffman, Gerber, &Semmel, 1988). Similarly, many building-level principals feel overwhelmed o��ver��whelm?tr.v. o��ver��whelmed, o��ver��whelm��ing, o��ver��whelms1. To surge over and submerge; engulf: waves overwhelming the rocky shoreline.2. a. andconfused by the REI movement. Madeleine Will may be absolutely correctin her recommendation that building-level administrators must beempowered to assemble appropriate professional and other resources fordelivering effective, coordinated, and comprehensive services for allstudents based on individual educational needs, rather than eligibilityfor special programs" Will, 1986, p. 413). However, manyprincipals may feel that they have not received proper training toassume this responsibility-nor, in some cases, consider this addedresponsibility to be realistic-given the many other demands andpressures currently being placed on them in the educational reformmovements. Of even greater concern to many LEA principals is the specialeducation backlash effect which is taking place within many communities.The current situation in Massachusetts provides a good example. Marantz(1988) cited the growing, and increasingly hostile, arguments that havebeen taking place in this state between parents of children in regulareducation and local/state education administrators relative to theperceived favoritism being granted to children with special needs at thefinancial and programmatic pro��gram��mat��ic?adj.1. Of, relating to, or having a program.2. Following an overall plan or schedule: a step-by-step, programmatic approach to problem solving.3. expense of nonhandicapped children. Principals in Massachusetts, as well as in other states, are facedwith a difficult dilemma. On one hand, they are being encouraged (somewould suggest, required) to assume much greater responsibility andadvocacy for special education programs, while, at the same time, theymust defend their positions in this regard to an increasingly largernumber of parents who are becoming more vocal and vehement in theirprotests and criticism of special education. This is not to suggest thatwhat REI advocates are proposing, regarding the necessity for greaterprincipal and regular classroom teacher involvement and ownership, iswrong. Yet, these policy and program implementors at the local levelmust be much more involved; their concerns must be heard; and, mostimportant, they must be provided with specific help to solve complex andoften extremely delicate problems. The REI debate has produced similarly frustrating frus��trate?tr.v. frus��trat��ed, frus��trat��ing, frus��trates1. a. To prevent from accomplishing a purpose or fulfilling a desire; thwart: dilemmas for manyspecial education administrators and teachers at the LEA level.Confusion reigns here, too. They are being asked to alter some verybasic philosophical and educational beliefs-as well as practices. It isnot uncommon for some special education directors and teachers to feelguilt, anger, suspicion, and possibly even betrayal BetrayalSee also Treachery.Judas Iscariotapostle who betrays Jesus. [N.T.: Matthew 26:15]Proteusthough engaged, steals his friend Valentine’s beloved, reveals his plot and effects his banishment. [Br. by much of what isembodied in the principles of the REI. For some, it clearly may be anissue of feeling threatened or losing an established professionalidentity. However, for many others, there appears to exist a genuine concernthat regular education still is not ready-in either attitude orinstructional capabilities to adequately meet the needs of students withspecial needs. Many special educators are skeptical and untrusting of aregular education system they have been taught to suspect. They harborfeelings of guilt for abandoning their students and feel betrayed byformer highly respected professors who seem to be suggesting a totalphilosophical flip-flop. " Again, the issue is not so much who is right or what is right.Rather, the REI must be an issue of honest, open dialogue that moremeaningfully involves practitioners as well as researchers and scholars.Practitioners need to be listened to, their views and ideas valued, andtheir feelings respected. As suggested by Clark, Lotto, and Astuto(1984) in their studies involving effective schools and school change,"the key for effective schools lies in the people who populate To plug in chips or components into a printed circuit board. A fully populated board is one that contains all the devices it can hold. particular schools at particular times and their interaction with theseorganizations. The search for the excellence in schools is the searchfor the excellence in people" (p. 50) [as cited in Skrtic, 1987a,p. 181. Especially teachers at the LEA level (both regular and special)must be convinced of the real need and value of changing. Change isalways difficult. It is particularly so when one feels left out of thechange process. Both personal and professional changes are being calledfor in the REI movement. There is the tendency for both regular andspecial education teachers to place blame on each other; to harborfeelings of resentment and distrust; and even to succumb suc��cumb?intr.v. suc��cumbed, suc��cumb��ing, suc��cumbs1. To submit to an overpowering force or yield to an overwhelming desire; give up or give in. See Synonyms at yield.2. To die. to cynicism CynicismSee also Pessimism.Antisthenes(444–371 B. C.) Greek philosopher and founder of Cynic school. [Gk. Hist.: NCE, 121]Apemantuschurlish, sarcastic advisor of Timon. [Br. Lit. .But the most dangerous of all consequences of excluding teachers frommeaningful participation in the REI debate is the apathy apathy/ap��a��thy/ (ap��ah-the) lack of feeling or emotion; indifference.apathet��ic ap��a��thyn.Lack of interest, concern, or emotion; indifference. that likelywill occur. If the REI is perceived as nothing more than just another ina long line of bandwagon band��wag��on?n.1. An elaborately decorated wagon used to transport musicians in a parade.2. Informal A cause or party that attracts increasing numbers of adherents: approaches, bereft of any substance or realvalue, I fear that its potential to truly improve the quality ofschooling and the quality of lives of students will never be realized. The bottom line in successful education was, is now, and willcontinue to be the quality of individual teacher-student interactions.Teachers must becomemore involved in the REI discourse. LACK OF CONSUMER PARTICIPATIONThe widespread absence of consumers themselves in the REI debate, if notsurprising, is particularly disturbing. Historically, there have beenfew efforts to directly involve students themselves in the design,implementation, and evaluation components of their own educationalprograms. Although several observers (e.g., Biklen, 1985; Blatt, 1981;Bogdan & Taylor, 1982; Davis, 1982; McCaul & Davis, 1988;Skrtic, 1988) have argued for greater consumer involvement in theoverall special education process, rarely are students' attitudes,feelings, and opinions directly assessed regarding "what is beingdone to them" under the guise Guise(gēz, gwēz), influential ducal family of France.The First Duke of GuiseThe family was founded as a cadet branch of the ruling house of Lorraine by Claude de Lorraine, 1st duc de Guise, 1496–1550, who received of sound educational policies andpractices. I am not referring to token involvement on the part of consumers.We already witness this all too often in the Individual EducationProgram (IEP IEPIn currencies, this is the abbreviation for the Irish Punt.Notes:The currency market, also known as the Foreign Exchange market, is the largest financial market in the world, with a daily average volume of over US $1 trillion. ) process (Tumbull, Tumbull, Summers, Brotherson, &Benson, 1986; Ysseldyke, Algozzine, & Thurlow, 1980). Students areprovided with general pieces of information about the programs they areabout to enter; the appropriate consent forms, where applicable, aresigned; even the diagnostic tools to be employed (irrespective of irrespective ofprep.Without consideration of; regardless of.irrespective ofpreposition despitetheiractual validity and appropriateness) that may eventually label them as"disabled" are briefly explained. Yet, seldom does any realdiscourse occur. Typically, professionals talk and clients (students andparents) listen. Few studies have attempted to assess students' perceptionsconcerning why they have been placed in special education programs, anunderstanding of their own handicapping condition label, and judgmentsregarding the efficacy of their own programs. The results of thesestudies have generally indicated wide differences between consumer andprofessional judgments and beliefs regarding the specific issuesaddressed (Davis, 1982; McCaul & Davis, 1988). 1 am advocating the real, meaningful involvement of consumers inthe REI debate, especially those students at the secondary level. Istrongly suspect that students frequently feel "jerked around"by the educational system. They become either benefactors or victims, invarying degree, of philosophical debate, litigation An action brought in court to enforce a particular right. The act or process of bringing a lawsuit in and of itself; a judicial contest; any dispute.When a person begins a civil lawsuit, the person enters into a process called litigation. , and legislativemandates that are subsequently transformed into educational policies andpractices (e.g., the principles of least restrictive education directorsand teachers to feel guilt, anger, suspicion, and possibly even betrayalby much of what is embodied in the principles of the REI. For some, itclearly may be an issue of feeling threatened or losing an establishedprofessional identity. However, for many others, there appears to exist a genuine concernthat regular education still is not ready-in either attitude orinstructional capabilities to adequately meet the needs of students withspecial needs. Many special educators are skeptical and untrusting of aregular education system they have been taught to suspect. They harborfeelings of guilt for abandoning their students and feel betrayed byformer highly respected professors who seem to be suggesting a totalphilosophical flip-flop. " Again, the issue is not so much who is right or what is right.Rather, the REI must be an issue of honest, open dialogue that moremeaningfully involves practitioners as well as researchers and scholars.Practitioners need to be listened to, their views and ideas valued, andtheir feelings respected. As suggested by Clark, Lotto, and Astuto(1984) in their studies involving effective schools and school change,"the key for effective schools lies in the people who populateparticular schools at particular times and their interaction with theseorganizations. The search for the excellence in schools is the searchfor the excellence in people" (p. 50) [as cited in Skrtic, 1987a,p. 181. Especially teachers at the LEA level (both regular and special)must be convinced of the real need and value of changing. Change isalways difficult. It is particularly so when one feels left out of thechange process. Both personal and professional changes are being calledfor in the REI movement. There is the tendency for both regular andspecial education teachers to place blame on each other; to harborfeelings of resentment and distrust; and even to succumb to cynicism.But the most dangerous of all consequences of excluding teachers frommeaningful participation in the REI debate is the apathy that likelywill occur. If the REI is perceived as nothing more than just another ina long line of bandwagon approaches, bereft of any substance or realvalue, I fear that its potential to truly improve the quality ofschooling and the quality of lives of students will never be realized. The bottom line in successful education was, is now, and willcontinue to be the quality of individual teacher-student interactions.Teachers must become more involved in the REI discourse. LACK OFCONSUMER PARTICIPATION The widespread absence of consumers themselves inthe REI debate, if not surprising, is particularly disturbing.Historically, there have been few efforts to directly involve studentsthemselves in the design, implementation, and evaluation components oftheir own educational programs. Although several observers (e.g.,Biklen, 1985; Blatt, 1981; Bogdan & Taylor, 1982; Davis, 1982;McCaul & Davis, 1988; Skrtic, 1988) have argued for greater consumerinvolvement in the overall special education process, rarely arestudents' attitudes, feelings, and opinions directly assessedregarding "what is being done to them" under the guise ofsound educational policies and practices. I am not referring to token involvement on the part of consumers.We already witness this all too often in the Individual EducationProgram (IEP) process (Tumbull, Tumbull, Summers, Brotherson, &Benson, 1986; Ysseldyke, Algozzine, & Thurlow, 1980). Students areprovided with general pieces of information about the programs they areabout to enter; the appropriate consent forms, where applicable, aresigned; even the diagnostic tools to be employed (irrespective of theiractual validity and appropriateness) that may eventually label them as"disabled" are briefly explained. Yet, seldom does any realdiscourse occur. Typically, professionals talk and clients (students andparents) listen. Few studies have attempted to assess students' perceptionsconcerning why they have been placed in special education programs, anunderstanding of their own handicapping condition label, and judgmentsregarding the efficacy of their own programs. The results of thesestudies have generally indicated wide differences between consumer andprofessional judgments and beliefs regarding the specific issuesaddressed (Davis, 1982; McCaul & Davis, 1988). 1 am advocating the real, meaningful involvement of consumers inthe REI debate, especially those students at the secondary level. Istrongly suspect that students frequently feel "jerked around"by the educational system. They become either benefactors or victims, invarying degree, of philosophical debate, litigation, and legislativemandates that are subsequently transformed into educational policies andpractices (e.g., the principles of least restrictive environment As part of the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the least restrictive environment is identified as one of the six principles that govern the education of students with disabilities. andmaximum feasible benefit-policies and practices that directly impacttheir daily lives). Yet, how often are students really listened to ortheir opinions truly valued? Do not misconstrue mis��con��strue?tr.v. mis��con��strued, mis��con��stru��ing, mis��con��struesTo mistake the meaning of; misinterpret.misconstrueVerb[-struing, -strued or overgeneralize Verb 1. overgeneralize - draw too general a conclusion; "It is dangerous to overgeneralize"overgeneraliseextrapolate, generalize, infer, generalise - draw from specific cases for more general cases the point that I am attemptingto make in this plea for greater consumer involvement in the current REIdebate. Clearly, federal, state, and local governing bodies have boththe right and responsibility to determine and monitor educational policyand practices in our schools. Likewise, professional educators, as wellas professionals representing other disciplines, have the responsibility(and, presumably pre��sum��a��ble?adj.That can be presumed or taken for granted; reasonable as a supposition: presumable causes of the disaster. the expertise) for analyzing educational environmentsand practices. These educators are responsible for makingrecommendations regarding optimal student learning and adjustment. I amnot suggesting that these "adults" be absolved of theirresponsibilities toward our children and youth, nor that students beexpected to make "adult decisions" without a sufficient livingand learning base. Very simply, I am urging that students not be denied access to theREI debate-that deliberate and purposeful pur��pose��ful?adj.1. Having a purpose; intentional: a purposeful musician.2. Having or manifesting purpose; determined: entered the room with a purposeful look. efforts be made to both talkwith them and listen to them about the issues. Should this not occurwith significantly greater frequency, not only will opportunities forvaluable input for the shaping of the debate be lost but also manystudents, both handicapped and nonhandicapped, will continue to laborunder totally invalid assumptions about what others are trying to dowith, for, and to them. INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER DISCIPLINES It must berecognized that the REI is much broader than a debate about educationalissues and concerns. It is rooted in political, economic, andsociological thought and action. Therefore, in total support ofSkrtic's recommendation (1988), this debate, to have any reallong-range impact, must be expanded to the voices of scholars in thesocial sciences and humanities . . . who can help us understand theplace of special education in the complex web of social, political,cultural, economic, and organizational interrelationships within whichwe and our clients live" (p. 475). The REI debate is really about how our nation's schools canbetter serve students who require special attention, interventions, andsupport systems to enjoy a better quality of life-educationally,personally, socially, and vocationally. For many years now, we havegiven these students, along with their programs, various labels:disadvantaged, special needs, disaffected dis��af��fect��ed?adj.Resentful and rebellious, especially against authority.disaf��fect , remedial, Chapter I, migrant mi��grant?n.1. One that moves from one region to another by chance, instinct, or plan.2. An itinerant worker who travels from one area to another in search of work.adj.Migratory. ,underachievers, and so forth. Although often an extremely heterogeneousgroup as measured by many variables, these students typically have hadone thing in common as judged by educators: They are viewed as differingfrom the established norm of a particular educational system at a givenpoint in time. Educational programs have been developed for thesestudents based on the assumption, true or false, that they aredifferent; they do not fit the normal mold; they possess deficits anddisadvantages of some type and degree that require atypical atypical/atyp��i��cal/ (-i-k'l) irregular; not conformable to the type; in microbiology, applied specifically to strains of unusual type. a��typ��i��caladj. interventions. Most educators would agree, however, that for many of thesestudents, their "problems" are not primarily educational inorigin. Rather, they are rooted in much deeper societal problems andissues (e.g., lack of health care, inadequate housing, poverty, anddysfunctional family dysfunctional familyPsychology A family with multiple 'internal'–eg sibling rivalries, parent-child– conflicts, domestic violence, mental illness, single parenthood, or 'external'–eg alcohol or drug abuse, extramarital affairs, gambling, environments). The educational needs possessed bythese students often pale in comparison to their other more basic humanneeds, such as shelter, food, and affection. Thus, school personnelfrequently are expected to develop programs that they know full well donot begin to address many students' real needs. This situation hascaused countless special education and other remedial teachers to becomeextremely frustrated frus��trate?tr.v. frus��trat��ed, frus��trat��ing, frus��trates1. a. To prevent from accomplishing a purpose or fulfilling a desire; thwart: , feeling that what they are doing with certainstudents will likely have minimal meaningful longrange impact. Putsimply-the environmental odds are perceived to be too great to overcomevia traditional educational interventions alone. This issue strikes right at the heart of the global question:"What are the purposes of education?" And more to the point,"What should be the parameters of education's responsibilityto students?" Education may be perceived as having very broadresponsibilities, including promoting positive mental health, developinglifelong leisure time skills, and providing very specific vocationaltraining. On the other hand, others may perceive education'sresponsibility to be very narrowly and exclusively focused: to teachacademics. Unfortunately, the students themselves continue to be thevictims of these controversies. It is not the students who have failed.Rather, "the system" has failed the students. The current REI debate will not likely provide a solution to thefar more complex problem of defining the goals of American public schooleducation. However, I suggest that the debate has the potential to helpclarify some very critical issues and questions. What iseducation's responsibility to students who deviate or differ fromthe established norm? The REI debate, if its discourse is sufficientlyfigorous, open, and democratized, can provide a vehicle and forum togenerate collaborative thinking, problem solving problem solvingProcess involved in finding a solution to a problem. Many animals routinely solve problems of locomotion, food finding, and shelter through trial and error. , and action related tomany dilemmas that currently exist in our schools. For example, who is responsible for the education of students whodo not qualify for special education programming services under currenteligibility criteria but who clearly appear to be in need of someinstructional and curricular modifications? Or, what are the legal,programmatic, and ethical responsibilities of schools for students whose"emotional problems" appear to be primarily home related anddo not appear to be "significantly interfering with academicperformance"-yet who clearly seem to be at risk and extremelyvulnerable youngsters who are in need of counseling intervention? Isthis a special education responsibility? A regular educationresponsibility? A family responsibility? A combination of all three? It would be naive to think that the REI debate has the potentialfor providing definitive, simple solutions to these problems.Nevertheless, it does have the potential to help clarify some of theissues and concerns, as well as to provide some clear direction,relative to the responsibilities of society, in general, and theeducation community, in particular, to students who are "fallingthrough the cracks." Because the issues and problems are muchbroader than educational in nature, scholars and thinkers representingother disciplines must be involved in the debate. If not, the issues andproblems, as well as the suggested solutions, will be too narrowlyfocused. The larger questions need to be asked. The broader perspectiveneeds to be sought. As advocated by such writers as Skrtic (1986, 1987a)and Edgar (1988), we must experiment with new paradigms ineducation-paradigms that may look drastically different from the presentand that take into full consideration the social, political, andeconomic influences on current educational environments. OTHERCONTEMPORARY DISCOURSES REI debators and critics must also recognizethat our debate" is not an isolated or independent discourse. Itshould not, and must not, be separated from other debates on broadersocietal issues currently taking place in America: homeless children andfamilies, child abuse, chemical abuse, unemployment and underemployment un��der��em��ployed?adj.1. Employed only part-time when one needs and desires full-time employment.2. Inadequately employed, especially employed at a low-paying job that requires less skill or training than one possesses. ,hunger, poverty, and so forth. The issues involved in these broaderdiscourses often are directly or indirectly related to the REI agenda.The voices of those who are participants in these very debates must beheard and their positions examined in light of their implications for,and relevance to, our REI discourse. Of more importance, they should beformally invited to share their thinking with us. CONCLUSION The REIdebate must be placed in proper perspective. It is not important whichscholars view themselves as, or are perceived by others as, being"winners" or "losers" in this discourse. If anysubstantial and meaningful benefit is to accrue from REI deliberations,practitioners and consumers must be more directly involved asparticipants. Issues and concerns currently being addressed as part of the REIdebate are important ones. They provide us with a rare opportunity torigorously evaluate public education's commitment to servinghandicapped and other special needs, at-risk students, as well as toassess its present level of organizational readiness necessary to notonly accommodate but also to respect and value individual studentdifferences. Most important, however, the REI debate is focusing, inpart, on quality-of-life issues-basic human needs issues that are muchmore global and significant than simply P.L. 94-142 compliance issues.REFERENCES Biklen, D. (Ed.). (1985). Achieving the complete school: Strategies for effective mainstreaming. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : Columbia University Columbia University,mainly in New York City; founded 1754 as King's College by grant of King George II; first college in New York City, fifth oldest in the United States; one of the eight Ivy League institutions. . Blatt, B. (1981). In and out of mentalretardation mental retardation,below average level of intellectual functioning, usually defined by an IQ of below 70 to 75, combined with limitations in the skills necessary for daily living. : Essays on educability ed��u��ca��ble?adj.Capable of being educated or taught: educable youngsters.ed , disability, and human policy. Austin, TX: PRO-ED. Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S. (1982). Inside out: Thesocial meaning of mental retardation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Clark, D. L., Lotto, L. S., & Astuto, T. A.(1984). Effective schools and school improvement: A comparative analysis of two lines of inquiry. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(3), 41-68. Davis, W. E. (1982, April).I'm glad you finally asked: Students' reactions to their special education program experiences. Paper presented at the international conference of The Council for Exceptional Children, Houston, TX. Edgar, E.(1987). Secondary programs in special education: Are many of themjustified? Exceptional Children, 53, 535-561. Edgar, E. (1988, March).New directions for education as an intervention for quality of life.Paper presented at the international conference of The Council forExceptinal Children, Washington, DC. Gartner, A., & Lipsky, D. K.(1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for allstudents. Harvard Educational Review The Harvard Educational Review is an interdisciplinary scholarly journal of opinion and research dealing with education, published by the Harvard Education Publishing Group. The journal was founded in 1930 with circulation to policymakers, researchers, administrators, and teachers. , 57, 367-395. Gerber, M. M. (1988).Tolerance and technology of instruction: Implications for specialeducation reform. Exceptional Children, 54, 309-314. Gersten, R.,Walker, H., Darch, C. (1988). Relationship between teachers'effectiveness and their tolerance for handicapped students. ExceptionalChildren, 54, 433438. Hallahan, D. P., Keller, C. E., McKinney, J. D.,Lloyd, J. W., & Bryan, T. (1988). Examining the research base of theregular education initiative: Efficacy studies and the adaptive learning (algorithm) adaptive learning - (Or "Hebbian learning") Learning where a system programs itself by adjusting weights or strengths until it produces the desired output. environment model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(i), 29-35; 55.Kauffman, J. M., Gerber, M. M., & Semmel, M. 1. (1988). Arguable ar��gu��a��ble?adj.1. Open to argument: an arguable question, still unresolved.2. That can be argued plausibly; defensible in argument: three arguable points of law. assumptions underlying the regular education initiative. Journal ofLearning Disabilities, 2](1), 6-11. Keogh, B. K. (1988). Improvingservices for problem learners: Rethinking and restructuring. Journal ofLearning Disabilities, 2](1), 19-22. Lieberman, L. M. (1985). Specialeducation and regular education: A merger made in heaven? ExceptionalChildren, 51, 513-516. Marantz, S. (1988, April 15). Special needs:Advocates twist law, critics say. The Boston Globe, pp. 1, 18. McCaul,E., & Davis, W. E. (1988). Special education students'perceptions relative to the strengths, weaknesses, and efficacy of theirown programs. Manuscript submitted for publication. Mesinger, J. F.(1985). Commentary on "A rationale for the merger of special andregular education" or, is it now time for the lamb to lie down withthe lion? Exceptional Children, 51, 510-512. Reynolds, M. C., Wang, C.,& Walberg, H. J. (1987). The necessary restructuring of special andregular education. Exceptional Children, 53, 391-398. Sapon-Shevin, M.(1987a, April). Merger: What it is-What it could be-Why we don'tagree-Why maybe we better make it work. Paper presented at the annualmeeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington,DC. Sapon-Shevin, M. (1987b). The national education reports and special education; Implications for students. ExceptionalChildren, 53, 300-307. Shepard, L. A. (1987). The new push forexcellence: Widening the schism schism,in religion: see heresy; Schism, Great. between regular and special education. Exceptional Children, 53, 327-329. Skrtic, T. M. (1986).The crisis in special education knowledge: A perspective on perspective. Focus on Exceptional Children, 18(7), 1-16. Skrtic, T. M. (1987a). Anorganizational analysis of special educational reform. Counterpoint counterpoint,in music, the art of combining melodies each of which is independent though forming part of a homogeneous texture. The term derives from the Latin for "point against point," meaning note against note in referring to the notation of plainsong. , 8(2), 15-19. Skrtic, T.M. (1987b). The national inquiry into the future of education for students with special needs. Counterpoint, 8(l), 6. Skytic, T. M. (1988). Response to the January executive commentary: No more noses to the glass. Exceptional Children, 54, 475-476. Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1984). Arationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51, 102-1 1 1. Toch, T. (1984, November). The dark sideof the excellence movement. Phi Delta Kappan, 173-176. Tumbull, A. P.,Tumbull, H. R., Summers, J. A., Brotherson, M. J., & Benson, H. A. (1986). Families, professionals, and exceptionality: A special partnership. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Charles Edward Merrill (October 19, 1885 – October 6 1956) was a philanthropist, stockbroker and one of the founders of Merrill Lynch & Company. Early yearsCharles E. Merrill, the son of physician Dr. . Will, M. C. (1986). Educatingchildren with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52, 411-415. Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., & Thurlow, M. L. (1980). A naturalistic nat��u��ral��is��tic?adj.1. Imitating or producing the effect or appearance of nature.2. Of or in accordance with the doctrines of naturalism. investigation of special education team meetings (Research Report No. 40). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota (body, education) University of Minnesota - The home of Gopher.http://umn.edu/.Address: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. Institute for Research on learning Disabilities. Yudof, M. G. (1984, March). Educationalpolicy research and the new consensus for the 1980's. Phi Delto Kappan, 456-459.