American Special Ed System (part 1)

The great (but unrealistic) American laws and policies

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is nothing but insanity. (Albert Einstein)

As I stated in my previous blog, the United States has a nearly perfect special education system. It has money, resources, policies, awareness, and a strong scientific community. Technically speaking, what more could you ask for? Still, I daresay, it is inefficient and ineffective, delivering little value for the money spent on it. In this section I will analyze three main aspects of special education—policies, school districts, and professionals.

The great (but unrealistic) American laws and policies

In terms of special education, there are two great laws in this country—the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Why are they great? These acts provide a basic safety net for individuals with disabilities. They ensure education for all children, irrespective of the type or severity of their disorders. They also require the school district where the child resides to provide a “least restrictive environment” for the child's education. This means school districts should provide free and appropriate public school education for individuals with disabilities between the ages of three to twenty-one. This includes services and equipment that a child with a disability requires, free of cost to the parent. These two laws give parents immense power to make decisions for their child. Parents of special need children fought hard to get this law passed and it is a great victory for mankind.

Now why are the laws unrealistic? No service or equipment comes without cost to the school. Since these things are required by law and the government pays for them, everything in special education is priced at a premium. The equipment is ridiculously overpriced. For instance, a simple record and playback instrument used by nonverbal children to communicate costs a minimum of three hundred and fifty dollars. A toy with the same functionality is available for three dollars. The electronic components of this equipment are available online from one to five cents. Professional services are expensive as well. Federal and state funds cover only a part of the expenses. What about the rest? Who will pay for it?

Moreover, legislation spells out academic standards for even severely disabled children's curriculum, requiring a child to “meet the approximate grade-level standards of the state educational agency.” This is not just ridiculous but stupid. Why should we teach a severely challenged child, who struggles to feed himself and meet basic needs, about polar bears and state capitals? Instead of spending money, resources, and time on teaching functional skills, we are spending it on academic skills that he may not learn or use in his life. Yes we should teach him to read and write, but only after he learns to take care of himself which includes feeding, dressing, brushing hair and teeth, moving around safely, etc. Basic life skills are most important for a severely disabled child.

Additionally, these laws give parents a false feeling that the government has a system in place which will do everything to “fix” their child and make him independent. With this strong conviction, parents trust the system and wait for the magic to happen. By the time parents realize that this is a fallacy, their child’s valuable initial ten years are gone and damage is already done.