The Experts below are selected from a list of 297 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Kenneth Tewel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Understanding Least Restrictive Environment—A key to avoiding parent-school conflict
The Urban Review, 1990Co-Authors: Howard Margolis, Kenneth TewelAbstract:The concept of Least Restrictive Environment is at the core of federal and state laws governing special education. Unfortunately, the concept is vague and difficult to operationalize. Thus, it is not unusual for parents of educationally handicapped students and school districts to find themselves in conflict over what Environment or program is Least Restrictive for the student. Such conflicts often escalate into acrimonious legal and emotional battles. Understanding the salient characteristics of the Least Restrictive Environment for individual students can preclude or minimize unnecessary conflicts that have little chance of generating creative solutions. This article identifies many of these characteristics and details what administrators can do to assure that placement decisions conform to the requirements of Least Restrictive Environment.
-
understanding Least Restrictive Environment a key to avoiding parent school conflict
The Urban Review, 1990Co-Authors: Howard Margolis, Kenneth TewelAbstract:The concept of Least Restrictive Environment is at the core of federal and state laws governing special education. Unfortunately, the concept is vague and difficult to operationalize. Thus, it is not unusual for parents of educationally handicapped students and school districts to find themselves in conflict over what Environment or program is Least Restrictive for the student. Such conflicts often escalate into acrimonious legal and emotional battles. Understanding the salient characteristics of the Least Restrictive Environment for individual students can preclude or minimize unnecessary conflicts that have little chance of generating creative solutions. This article identifies many of these characteristics and details what administrators can do to assure that placement decisions conform to the requirements of Least Restrictive Environment.
Howard Margolis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Ethical and Legal Issues in Consultation
Remedial and Special Education, 1996Co-Authors: Timothy E Heron, Stacy A. Martz, Howard MargolisAbstract:This article discusses the nature of ethics and addresses many of the complex ethical and legal issues that challenge consultants daily. It offers a framework for making sound ethical and legal decisions that serve students effectively. Critical legal concepts, such as Least Restrictive Environment and free appropriate public education, are discussed. Finally, practical suggestions are offered for avoiding common ethical and legal pitfalls.
-
Understanding Least Restrictive Environment—A key to avoiding parent-school conflict
The Urban Review, 1990Co-Authors: Howard Margolis, Kenneth TewelAbstract:The concept of Least Restrictive Environment is at the core of federal and state laws governing special education. Unfortunately, the concept is vague and difficult to operationalize. Thus, it is not unusual for parents of educationally handicapped students and school districts to find themselves in conflict over what Environment or program is Least Restrictive for the student. Such conflicts often escalate into acrimonious legal and emotional battles. Understanding the salient characteristics of the Least Restrictive Environment for individual students can preclude or minimize unnecessary conflicts that have little chance of generating creative solutions. This article identifies many of these characteristics and details what administrators can do to assure that placement decisions conform to the requirements of Least Restrictive Environment.
-
understanding Least Restrictive Environment a key to avoiding parent school conflict
The Urban Review, 1990Co-Authors: Howard Margolis, Kenneth TewelAbstract:The concept of Least Restrictive Environment is at the core of federal and state laws governing special education. Unfortunately, the concept is vague and difficult to operationalize. Thus, it is not unusual for parents of educationally handicapped students and school districts to find themselves in conflict over what Environment or program is Least Restrictive for the student. Such conflicts often escalate into acrimonious legal and emotional battles. Understanding the salient characteristics of the Least Restrictive Environment for individual students can preclude or minimize unnecessary conflicts that have little chance of generating creative solutions. This article identifies many of these characteristics and details what administrators can do to assure that placement decisions conform to the requirements of Least Restrictive Environment.
Philip Dimattia - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the idea s Least Restrictive Environment mandate legal implications
Exceptional Children, 1994Co-Authors: Allan G Osborne, Philip DimattiaAbstract:The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) states that students with disabilities are to be provided with a free appropriate public education in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). During the early years of the IDEA, the courts generally deferred to school officials on LRE matters and ruled in favor of more Restrictive placements. In some recent cases, however, courts have taken a more activist stance. These decisions may signal a new era in LRE case law. Nineteen years after the passage of P.L. 94–142, the courts may be growing impatient with school officials for not providing less Restrictive Environments for students with disabilities.
-
Mainstreaming Students with Severe Disabilities: Implications for Public Policy.
1992Co-Authors: Allan G Osborne, Philip DimattiaAbstract:Major court decisions concerning the Least Restrictive Environment for students with severe disabilities are analyzed and conclusions are drawn outlining the current status of case law. Court cases have weighed the benefits of mainstreaming against the benefits of providing greater or more specialized services in a segregated program. In general, the courts have held that it is appropriate to sacrifice a degree of academic quality for the sake of socialization and that mainstreaming is not required for all students with disabilities but must be provided, where appropriate, to the maximum extent feasible. School districts are required to use supplementary aids and services to facilitate mainstreaming but are not required to always provide mainstreaming in the student's home school. The article suggests that if school systems do not speed up their restructuring to provide students with an appropriate education in the Least Restrictive Environment, they are likely to be required to do so by court orders. (Contains 23 references.) (DB) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** r() MAINSTREAMING STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES: IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY Allan G. Osborne, Jr. Quincy (MA) Public Schools Bridgewater State College
Susan Brody Hasazi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
rethinking implementation of the Least Restrictive Environment policy of the idea educational leaders in the forefront
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 1996Co-Authors: Annette M Liggett, A P Johnston, Susan Brody HasaziAbstract:In a qualitative study of the implementation of the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) policy of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), one singular finding stood out: Where significant change was taking place, it was educational leaders who were making it happen. Through a clear focus on values, a thorough knowledge of the system, and having the conceptual, theoretical, and practical skills involved in sophisticated organizational change, these administrators spoke enthusiastically and confidently of their efforts. Individuals and associations outside this administration-dominated group played relatively nominal roles in effecting change.
-
a qualitative policy study of the Least Restrictive Environment provision of the individuals with disabilities education act
Exceptional Children, 1994Co-Authors: Susan Brody Hasazi, Annette M Liggett, A P Johnston, Richard A SchattmanAbstract:A multistate, qualitative policy study, conducted from 1989 to 1992, investigated how 6 states and 12 local school districts implemented the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) provision of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Eight sites were relatively high users of separate facilities for educating students with disabilities, and 10 were low users. Six factors, including financing and the state-local context, influenced the implementation of LRE. Although the LRE policy has influenced the way that states and districts educate students with disabilities, the federal law and regulations have little control over how leaders view the policy, the structure and political realities present, and the recursive nature of policy systems at all levels.
Carl Lashley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
how building principals made sense of free and appropriate public education in the Least Restrictive Environment
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 2014Co-Authors: Meagan Sumbera, Barbara L Pazey, Carl LashleyAbstract:Confusion among school leaders regarding how to interpret and implement special education legislation, and specific federal and state policies and mandates such as a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) at the school-site level has existed since the 1970s and continues to exist. This metasynthesis explores the literature surrounding sensemaking by which building principals adapt and transform policy as they enact it in their schools. Findings suggest that a phenomenon of internal forces had a more significant influence on the actions that took place throughout their sensemaking of LRE and FAPE.