“Inequalities of Children in Original Endowment”: How Intelligence Testing Transformed Early Special Education in a North American City School System

2013 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 401-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Ellis

“There are few if any more significant events in modern educational history than the developments which have recently taken place in methods of mental measurement,” Lewis Terman wrote in 1923 about the intelligence testing movement he did so much to pioneer in American schools throughout the 1920s. Indeed educational historians, particularly Paul Chapman, have shown that the rise of intelligence testing provoked large and relatively swift changes in public education, enabling school systems to sort and stream their students by ability on an unprecedented scale. “By 1930,” Chapman writes, “both intelligence testing and ability grouping had become central features of the educational system.” Less often talked about are the effects of intelligence testing and the concept of intelligence quotient (IQ) on early special education classes, and on the pupils who attended them. In fact, Terman recognized the significance of IQ testing to special education as well. In 1919, he wrote that IQ tests would help to turn the existing logic of learning problems on its head by proving that “the retardation problem is exactly the reverse of what it is popularly supposed to be.”

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thom Axelsson

In this article, I discuss how Foucault may help us to reach a different understanding of special education. This article primarily draws on two analytical tools from Foucault’s ‘toolbox’: genealogy and governmentality. These tools are used to analyse three different cases of intelligence testing from the debate concerning the Swedish school organization in the early twentieth century. It is possible to see intelligence-quotient (IQ) testing as an overarching tool for controlling social behaviour. Intelligence-quotient testing was an important tool of power, with the aim of establishing certain regimes of truth on a societal as well as on an individual level. This article shows through a Foucauldian analysis that we should be careful in interpreting this entirely as an expression of state power from above or as different experts’ intentions. Rather, by using a genealogical approach, we can attempt to (re)write the history of interpretations, or problematizations, and then we can utilize a perspective of governmentality that focuses on the techniques and their effects.


Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Michael Rozalski ◽  
Mitchell L. Yell ◽  
Jacob Warner

In 1975, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1990) established the essential obligation of special education law, which is to develop a student’s individualized special education program that enables them to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE was defined in the federal law as special education and related services that: (a) are provided at public expense, (b) meet the standards of the state education agency, (c) include preschool, elementary, or secondary education, and (d) are provided in conformity with a student’s individualized education program (IEP). Thus, the IEP is the blueprint of an individual student’s FAPE. The importance of FAPE has been shown in the number of disputes that have arisen over the issue. In fact 85% to 90% of all special education litigation involves disagreements over the FAPE that students receive. FAPE issues boil down to the process and content of a student’s IEP. In this article, we differentiate procedural (process) and substantive (content) violations and provide specific guidance on how to avoid both process and content errors when drafting and implementing students’ IEPs.


2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-35
Author(s):  
Jenny Masur

Many cultural anthropologists have studied networks and how people reinterpret and attach symbols to these networks, pulling symbols from a grab-bag of collectively significant events and personages. As an ethnographer working for a new National Park Service program, I find myself involved in creating "networks" and affecting construction of "meanings," rather than studying the process as an outside observer. In the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom, created by Congress, my colleagues and I affect and effect relationships between groups previously unfamiliar with one another or previously not considered to fit under one umbrella. It would it be putting on blinders to analyze "transformations of popular concepts of the Underground Railroad" without considering the National Park Service and other cultural resource managers' role in public education, historic preservation, and use of memory in exhibits and publications.


1979 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 37-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Schworm

The use and function of task analysis in special education is becoming the most proposed instructional system for teaching children and adults with learning problems. In general, the term task analysis has acquired a myriad of definition and meaning that lacks precision. This article identifies and clarifies the variety of meanings of the term, and examines the instructional contexts where the procedures may apply. A sample of specific and general task analysis procedures found in the literature are typed by emphasis: content, interaction, and prerequisite; by size: single units of behavior or entire skills; and by kind: perceptual-motor or symbolic-conceptual. Finally, the paper examines a rationale for implementing precise step-by-step teaching for individuals who do not respond to regular instruction.


1986 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernie Thorley ◽  
Meredith Martin ◽  
Joan Jardine

The past decade saw a movement towards consensus in special education as personnel increasingly directed their attention to a literal interpretation of special education. At the same time, there was a shift from the old concern with extensive diagnosis and categorization of child-centred, organically based deficits, as the poor returns of this approach became apparent to parents, to teachers and to all other personnel involved with children needing assistance in learning.In essence, special education is about preventing, remedying, reducing and offsetting the effects of learning problems. Facts about what can or cannot be done to expand learning and learning ability provide the basic propositions from which all conclusions in special education must be drawn. Special educators recognise that learning ability within a domain is, to a large extent, learned and that failures need not be predictable nor inevitable.Influential in bringing about this new conceptualisation was the effect of the most exciting development in special education in the last two decades: an extensive and rapid growth in the power of instruction. This improvement was particularly apparent to those people who had access to the latest developments, on a worldwide basis, and who had the opportunity to check their magnitude in model projects. Almost overnight it became clear that special education services had to change completely. At the same time the most frustrating and disappointing feature of this era was the fact that so much of the newly created potential for helping special children remained largely unexploited as far as the vast number of “at risk” children was concerned. Consequently, the great expectations that were generated were often comprehensively and persistently thwarted as professionals, schools and systems failed to make the necessary adjustments. “It was the best of times; it was the worst of times.” This paper looks at prospects both from the point of view of new advances in instructional research, their origins and potential, and also at ways in which we can encourage professionals, schools and systems to adjust to these advances.


Author(s):  
Michael L. Hardman ◽  
John McDonnell ◽  
Marshall Welch

Since its original passage in 1975 as Public Law 94-142, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has been the cornerstone of practice in special education. This federal law has enabled all eligible students with disabilities to access a free and appropriate public education. During the past 2 years, the 104th Congress has debated vigorously some of the law's basic tenets (e.g., definition of disability, content of the individualized education plan [IEP], parental rights to attorneys, fees, discipline, and placement). The basic requirements of the law remain intact and continue to shape the scope and content of special education. This article addresses whether or not the assumptions upon which IDEA is based remain valid as we approach the 21st century. We critique these assumptions within the context of four requirements of IDEA: (a) eligibility and labeling, (b) free and appropriate public education, (c) the individualized education program (IEP), and (d) the least restrictive environment. Recommendations for changes in existing law relative to each of the above requirements are presented.


1983 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 448-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry Maheady ◽  
Richard Towne ◽  
Bob Algozzine ◽  
Jane Mercer ◽  
James Ysseldyke

Although the problem of minority overrepresentation in special education programs for the mildly handicapped has been widely recognized and documented, the factors responsible for such an overrepresentation remain the source of much controversy. The most popular explanation continues to be the presence of systematic bias in the assessment process, particularly with regard to intelligence testing. Unfortunately, attempts at isolating and controlling specific facets of this bias have been largely unsuccessful. Furthermore, preoccupation with this problem has detracted our attention from a much more pressing concern: the identification and provision of effective instructional services prior to referring minority students to special education. The purpose of this manuscript was to describe alternative approaches to dealing with the overrepresentation problem. Specifically, we have highlighted the importance of using alternative instructional strategies prior to referral, and have described five practices that appear to hold promise in this area.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document