Still Caught in the LRE Continuum: How the Least Restrictive Environment Principle Perpetuates Segregated Practices

• In Event: Tracing the Bold Lines Drawn by Steven J. Taylor

Abstract

In 1988 Taylor suggested that although the least restrictive environment (LRE) principle of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHC) was “extremely forward thinking for its time” (p.227), it led to problematic policies and practices that work against people with disabilities. He explained that when a continuum of special education placements exists, there is an organizational tendency to continue practices that fill those places with students. Taylor described how the courts’ interpretation of the LRE principle was uneven and although professional organizations claimed their support of it, policies and practices that were implemented based on the LRE showed their subjectivity and biases, in many instances toward more restrictive placements. “As a legal concept and policy direction,” Taylor noted, “LRE helped to create options and alternatives” (p.227) to the segregated placements that were common prior to the EHA. However, after only a decade since its implementation, Taylor recognized its limitations and challenged himself and others “to find new ideas, concepts, and principles to guide us” (p.227) to complete integration.
Overview of the presentation & structure
In this paper I revisit this issue first outlined by Taylor, describing how the LRE principle of the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004) is itself used to justify the segregation of some students with disabilities, particularly students of color (Beratan, 2006; Borthwick, 2010; Ferri and Connor, 2005; Fierros, 2006; Nesbit, 2004; Skrtic & McCall, 2010). Far from the advancements of other civil rights legislation with regard to equity, the flaws of the continuum outlined by Steve Taylor nearly three decades ago have served as a barrier from moving society forward. Taylor’s call for “a shift in focus” has been largely unrealized and thus a radical transformation is overdue to move from the special education system that involves “team” decision-making about where on the continuum each child “fits” to a more equitable system driven by inclusive values. At a minimum, the language of least restrictive rather than most included needs to be addressed. In this paper I outline how decades of research provide evidence that inclusion is not only possible, but considered best practice. The adoption of the Common Core State Standards across the country along with images of the first Disability Rights parade in NYC indicate the social climate and political will is ready to take on Taylor’s challenge for full integration for people with disabilities. I suggest beneficial pedagogical practices associated with IDEIA (2004) such as universal design for learning and multi-disciplinary assessments be subsumed under the next reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), and that related civil rights and procedural safeguards be addressed by the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990). It would be an honor to his legacy to address the challenge Steve Taylor made to mandate integration in all facets of community, and particularly in educational contexts for our children with disabilities.

Author

• Janet S. Sauer, Lesley University