Search

A study was conducted of special education referral and placement practices within Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools. A group of 650 low-achieving elementary school students, identified to be "at risk" for failure, was monitored to examine special education referrals or placements. Three hundred of the students were studied to determine the types of interventions taking place to improve the students' achievement. It was found that minorities, especially Blacks and Hispanics, were over-represented in the handicapping categories of learning disabilities and speech/language disorders. This over-representation was felt to be due, in part, to inappropriate identification of low achievement factors as a handicapping indicator. No significant differences were found in referral practices to explain the increased odds of special education labeling for minority groups. Staff expectations and perceptions were found to be powerful factors in the referral process. Teachers referred students because they perceived them to be achieving at a level below their peers. Staff seemed unaware of other regular education resources to assist low-achieving students. Classroom teachers were most likely to use management interventions rather than instructional interventions to assist the students. Educational implications of these selected findings and suggestions for improving the situation are offered. (JDD)

The paper raises concerns about current intervention practices used with children who, while not handicapped, have academic and/or behavioral problems and who may be labeled handicapped. A lack of options for these high risk students is noted in regular programs, and the impact on the student and the system of the referral-to-testing-to-labeling process is explored. The paper suggests the need to examine notions about interventions and to see prereferral interventions as a series of preventive interventions. It is suggested that interventions may be viewed as strategic or nonstrategic actions, and may be classified as proactive (strategic modification at the classroom level), reactive (nonstrategic actions lacking a goal-directed, integrated, planned effect), or protensive (strategic and precautionary actions having continuance in time). The paper concludes by calling on practitioners to implement and evaluate preventive interventions before students are referred. References are appended. (CL)