Least Restrictive Environment Programming for Individuals with Hearing Impairments: A Response to Butterfield

1993 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Decker
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Physical Education ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Hearing Impairments ◽  
Supportive Services ◽  
Deaf Students ◽  
Cultural Foundations ◽  
Regular Class ◽  
Class Placement ◽  
Restrictive Environment

This paper is in response to the article recently publishedin Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly entitled “Physical Education and Sport for the Deaf: Rethinking the Least Restrictive Environment” (Butterfield, 1991). Dr. Butterfield maintained that regular class placement of deaf students is inappropriate whereas such placements lack (a) cultural foundations unique to deaf individuals and essentials for their optimal development and (b) appropriate supportive services vital for the education of such students. In response, the present paper (a) delineates terminology frequently applied to individuals with hearing impairments and (b) maintains that failures of least restrictive environment placement are failures of implementation rather than of conception. Specifically, it is hypothesized taht lack of estabilished supportive services for students with hearing impairments may be traced, in part, to rejection of the least restrictive environment concept by such students and their parents/guardians. This paper contends that individuals with hearing impairments have much more to gain than to lose from increasing ties to the hearing world, particularly in educational settings.

Physical Education Least Restrictive Environment Continua Used in the United States

1995 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Decker ◽  
Paul Jansma
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Physical Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Geographic Region ◽  
Adapted Physical Education ◽  
School Year ◽  
Regular Class ◽  
Restrictive Environment

For over 15 years it has been public policy to educate students with disabilities, to the maximum extent possible, in the least restrictive environment (LRE) alongside their peers without disabilities. However, scarce empirical data exist documenting nationwide efforts to comply with the LRE mandate. The purpose of this study was to determine what types of LRE continua are in use in physical education throughout the United States. Subjects were physical education personnel in 452 schools throughout the United States. Data were collected regarding the usage of physical education LRE placement continua across enrollment level, grade range, metro status, and geographic region. Results indicate that while numerous (N = 26) physical education LRE continua were used during the 1988-89 school year, in most cases students with disabilities received physical education in a regular class setting with little or no access to adapted physical education. These results indicate that the utility of traditional physical education LRE placement continua may be suspect.

Special Education Placement: Is it What You Know or Where You Live?

1989 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 459-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard P. Blackman
Keyword(s):  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Regular Classroom ◽  
School Buildings ◽  
Special Education Placement ◽  
Regular School ◽  
Regular Class ◽  
Class Placement ◽  
Restrictive Environment

Danielson and Bellamy's article on federal data on segregated placement of students with disabilities (see pp. 448–455 of this issue) points out the failings in many situations to live up to the intent of Public Law 94–142, which clearly sets forth a presumption in favor of regular class placement in regular school buildings for children with disabilities. The need to eliminate geographic and funding restrictions to placement of students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment is stressed. Realistic but affirmative action and closer scrutiny of demonstration projects that have successfully integrated children with various disabilities into the regular classroom should be the focus of efforts.

Least Restrictive Environment: A Response to Decker

1993 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Butterfield
Keyword(s):  
Public School ◽  
Physical Education ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Residential School ◽  
Social Emotional ◽  
School Placement ◽  
Restrictive Environment

Decker contends that deaf children should be educated in regular public school classrooms. In response, it is argued that due to their unique social/emotional/cultural needs, some deaf children benefit from residential school placement–particularly in physical education. Use of the term deaf is also discussed.

Revisiting the Narrative about Least Restrictive Environment in Physical Education

Quest ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley J. Wilson ◽  
Justin Anthony Haegele ◽  
Luke E. Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Physical Education ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Restrictive Environment

Physical Education and Sport for the Deaf: Rethinking the Least Restrictive Environment

1991 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Butterfield
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Physical Education ◽  
Deaf Education ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Residential Schools ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Educational Placement ◽  
Language Needs ◽  
Restrictive Environment ◽  
Placement Option

Efforts to include children with disabilities in mainstream settings often raise questions as to what constitutes “least restrictive.” This paper addresses educational placement of deaf children, especially as it pertains to physical education and sport. Many leaders in deaf education hold that placement of deaf children in public schools often occurs without regard to their socioemotional/cultural/language needs. This paper provides a rationale for the residential school as a viable and legitimate placement option for deaf children. Also included in the paper is a brief historical overview of deaf education including the contributions of residential schools to deaf sport and deaf culture.

The Modified Physical Education Class: An Option for the Least Restrictive Environment

2017 ◽  
Vol 88 (7) ◽  
pp. 10-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren J. Lieberman ◽  
Lauren Cavanaugh ◽  
Justin A. Haegele ◽  
Rocco Aiello ◽  
Wesley J. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Physical Education ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Physical Education Class ◽  
Education Class ◽  
Restrictive Environment

Adapted Physical Education Research Trends; 1970-1990

1986 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey D. Broadhead
Keyword(s):  
Physical Education ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Adapted Physical Education ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Evaluation Of Performance ◽  
Dissemination Of Research ◽  
1960S And 1970S ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Restrictive Environment

It may be that important happenings during the 1960s and 1970s have helped to bring about the increased amount of published research in adapted physical education (APE), Three major research thrusts were identified which advanced the APE knowledge base: the evaluation of performance, physical education in the least restrictive environment, and effective programming. Specific suggestions were made for improving the quality of future research, and for the dissemination of research results.

A Statewide Survey of Adapted Physical Education Service Delivery and Teacher In-Service Training

1995 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy Potter Chandler ◽  
J. Leon Greene
Keyword(s):  
Physical Education ◽  
Motor Development ◽  
Least Restrictive Environment ◽  
Adapted Physical Education ◽  
Curriculum Content ◽  
Perceived Needs ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Service Training ◽  
Disability Categories ◽  
Restrictive Environment

The purpose of the study was to examine student placements, use of least restrictive environment (LRE) options, teachers’ perceived needs, curriculum content, and activity options in regular physical education (RPE) and adapted physical education (APE) during a period of restructuring from segregated to LRE placements. The Integration Status Questionnaire (ISQ) was used to obtain data with a return rate of 37% among RPE teachers and 78% among APE teachers. Of the 1,627 students receiving APE, 714 were being served in self-contained settings, with no reliable data available as to disability categories of children served or other LRE options being used. The majority of teachers in both groups had received general in-service training for inclusion, but only 4% had received in-service training specific to physical education content. The examination of curriculum content indicated that RPE teachers spent the majority of teaching time on sport skills and traditional games while APE teachers concentrated on sensory motor development and health-related fitness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document