Student-Centered Educational Placement Decisions:  The Meaning, Interpretation, and Application of Least Restrictive Environment

Kathleen Mary Huebner

Pennsylvania College of Optometry

Alan J. Koenig

Texas Tech University

Introduction

            In the mid-1970’s, "least restrictive environment" (LRE) was introduced into the special education language.  As implementation ensued, LRE took on various meanings by policy makers, administrators, parents, and teachers.  The lack of mutual understanding has resulted in a continuing controversy over the interpretation and application of the mandates of LRE.

            Legislation requires that each public education agency have available a full continuum of placements, including regular classroom programs, special classroom programs, special schools, home-bound instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions.  Despite the mandate for a full continuum of options, there have been concerted attempts by various groups in the field of educating students with disabilities to redefine LRE in a manner which would recognize only the regular classroom as the least restrictive environment.  This paper presents the position of the Division on Visual Impairments (DVI) by focusing on the meaning and interpretation of LRE in a manner consistent with existing legislation and consistent with the varied needs of students with visual impairments.

Appropriate and Enabling Learning Environments

            The overriding emphasis on LRE has put placement decisions in the foreground of debate rather than determination of:  (a) each student's individual and unique needs, (b) how an individual's assessed needs can best be met, and (c) the educational setting where identified needs can be met.   The intent of LRE is indeed maximum integration, but this should be balanced by the overriding emphasis on "most appropriate placement" (Curry & Hatlen, 1988) or "most enabling placement" (Huebner, 1989).

            Most appropriate placement is defined as "the environment in which all the needs of a student are best met, where the student acquires the greatest benefits from the educational program" (Curry & Hatlen, 1988, p. 420).  The “most enabling placement is one in which the student has the opportunity to fully participate in all aspects of the school experience including acquisition of special skills, thereby providing an academic, social, and emotional environment that encourages a holistic development in preparation for life.  The issue is the quality of education provided within a particular placement as measured by the degree to which specific, unique needs of a student with a visual impairment, as appropriately assessed and identified in his or her IEP, can be met" (Huebner, 1989).

            Unfortunately, a child's opportunity to receive special education and related services resulting from his or her disability-specific needs may be partially dependent upon where he or she lives or other factors. Will (1986) stated:

Findings in the past indicate that placements sometimes are not based on the unique educational needs of the individual child.  Placement decisions may have been determined by the availability of space, transportation, or required related services or by the category of condition.  (p. 1)

Although there is no research to indicate the exact numbers of students with visual impairments who are or are not receiving their education in the most appropriate or most enabling educational placements, anecdotal information from the field indicates that some students are not receiving the most meaningful education regardless of setting (Tuttle, 1986).

            Students with visual impairments have many unique educational needs that vary according to individual characteristics.  The lack of vision creates profound challenges to learning that may be summarized as follows:

      1.   The need to learn through alternative mediums such as touch and sound;

      2.   The need for specialized skills and equipment for learning through alternative sensory modalities;

      3.   The need for direct instruction of skills which others learn incidentally through observation and modeling;

      4.   The need for individualized instruction when group instruction for learning specialized skills may not be meaningful or appropriate; and

      5.   The need for equal access to the core curriculum and the expanded core curriculum (Corn, Hatlen, Huebner, Siller, & Ryan, 1995; Hatlen, 1996). The core curriculum "...consists of two parts. The first parallels that which is provided to sighted peers (Corn et. al., p. 13). The core curriculum includes subjects such as English, mathematics, health, social studies, economics, fine arts, other languages, science, physical education, history, business, and vocational education. For students with visual impairments to have meaningful educational experiences, in which they can participate fully, some instructional strategies may need to be modified. In addition to the core curriculum, an expanded core curriculum is required for students with visual impairments. The expanded core curriculum includes compensatory academic skills, including communication modes, orientation and mobility, social interaction skills, independent living skills, recreation and leisure skills, career education, technology, and visual efficiency skills. (LATVI, 1985; Curry & Hatlen, 1988; Huebner, 1989; Corn, et. al., 1995; and Hatlen, 1996).

            Teachers specifically trained and certified in educating students with visual impairments must be available to provide direct instruction in the expanded core curriculum and to serve as a primary educational resource for students and their families.  Teachers of students who are blind or who have low vision must be knowledgeable of eye conditions and the possible impact of these conditions on growth, development, and learning; have a working knowledge of the disability-specific skills needed by students with visual impairments; and utilize effective, specialized assessment and teaching techniques.  Unfortunately, there is a critical shortage of qualified teachers who have this specialized knowledge and skills which further exacerbates the difficulties of providing students with visual impairments with an education in the most appropriate and most enabling environment.

            Currently special schools, self-contained classrooms, resource rooms, itinerant teaching programs, and teacher-consultant models of service delivery are being used to provide special education services to students with visual impairments (Hazekamp & Huebner, 1989).  Progressive special schools provide many services to students in their respective states in addition to on-campus instruction and residential facilities.  Many have dynamic outreach services which serve students with visual impairments in their home communities by providing assistance in the form of direct itinerant services, inservice training for parents and educators, training sites for practicum experiences, early intervention services, assessment and diagnostic services, technical assistance to local education agencies, production and distribution of specialized materials, and support to parent groups.  In this way, special schools are helping to assure that appropriate services are delivered regardless of the physical location of a student's program.

            The most appropriate and enabling educational environment must be based on the individual needs of a student with a visual impairment as determined through the educational team process and as specified in the IEP.  These educational needs must be reviewed at least annually as specified by law.  It is possible, and indeed probable, that a student's need for instruction in the expanded core curriculum will require various educational placements during his or her school years.  A continuum or array of services will likely be necessary that uses services from a combination of program options.  One component of this array alone is not likely to meet all needs of a student throughout his or her school career, but in concert with, and supported by, other components of a full array of services, such needs can be effectively addressed.

Position

            The members of DVI believe that the least restrictive environment for a student with a visual impairment is the most enabling and most appropriate educational environment--the environment in which specialized services are provided by qualified staff with the intensity, consistency, and frequency needed by each student commensurate with all of his or her specific needs as appropriately identified in the IEP.

            DVH supports the availability of a full continuum or array of educational placements and services for students with visual impairments, including special classes and special schools.  Some students who are blind or who have low vision will require the intensity of specialized instruction in skills provided by special schools, while the needs of other students will be effectively met in regular classroom programs with appropriate support services.  Special schools should never be viewed as the only placement option for any student, and neither should public day school programs.  All options from a complete array of placements and services must be considered by educational teams before a decision is made as to the environment which will provide a student full access to quality educational services based on an individual student’s needs.

            DVH believes that the objective of any educational programs is preparation for integration in all facets of life.  Students with visual impairments have unique and intensive needs which can only be met by qualified specialists, a full array of program options, and cooperative endeavors to promote high quality educational programs which will provide the foundation for living and working in the home and community.  Failure to recognize the disability-specific needs of students with visual impairments and to provide the educational services to address these needs is unconscionable.  DVI is committed to child-centered decision making through the educational team process which encourages and respects the desires of both parents and students.

            DVI opposes any action which seeks to eliminate any of the existing educational placement options.  Rather than reducing options, DVI is committed to expanding the array of services to more appropriately meet the multifaceted needs of students with visual impairments.   Furthermore, DVI is committed to increasing the supply of qualified educators to assure that the needs of students with visual impairments can be met and to provide the creative leadership needed to guide the development of future services in this low prevalence disability area.

References

Corn, A.L., Hatlen, P., Huebner, K.M., Siller, M.A., & Ryan, F. (1995). The national agenda for education of children and youths with visual impairments, including those with multiple disabilities. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

Curry, S. A., & Hatlen, P. H. (1988).  Meeting the unique educational needs of visually impaired pupils through appropriate placement.  Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 82, 417-424.

Hatlen, P. (1996). The core curriculum for blind and visually impaired students, including those with additional disabilities. RE:view, 28, 25-32.

Hazekamp, J., & Huebner, K. M. (1989).  Program planning and evaluation for blind and visually impaired students:  National guidelines for educational excellence.  New York, NY:  American Foundation for the Blind.

Huebner, K. M. (1989).  The education of students with disabilities:  Where do we stand? Unpublished congressional testimony.  New York, NY:  American Foundation for the Blind.

LATVI. (1985).  Statement of educational needs of visually impaired students.  New York, NY:  American Foundation for the Blind.

Tuttle, D. W. (1986).  Educational programming.  In G. T. Scholl (Ed.), Foundations of education for blind and visually  impaired children and youth:  Theory and practice.  New York, NY:  American Foundation for the Blind.

Will, M. (1986).  Clarifying the standards:  Placement in a least restrictive environment.  OSERS News in Print, Washington, D.C., 1(2).

Back to DVI Home Page

Back to DVI Position Paper Index