UCLA

As per the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004), students who receive school-based special education services must be educated in the least restrictive environment and participate in the general education curriculum used for instruction of all students. This includes students with extensive support needs who may require more supports and services to access their free and appropriate public education. The present study used longitudinal special education administrative record data from a large school district to review general education access for students with extensive support needs who were educated with alternate curriculum in grades 6-12. The three-part study analyzed timing and dosage of alternate curriculum participation, identified the predictors of school placements and time spent in a general education classroom, and further investigated students who experienced “dual segregation” – those who had a highly restrictive placement while educated with alternate curriculum. First, results showed that, of the 2,192 students who received IEP services for seven years of middle and high school in the district and who were educated with alternate curriculum for at least one of those years, over 68% (n = 1,497) were educated with alternate curriculum for all seven years. Additionally, of the students who were switched from general curriculum to alternate curriculum in middle/high school (n=690), the highest rate of switching occurred in 7th grade (25%). The results of logistic regression found that disability classifications, grade level, free/reduced-priced lunch state, and race/ethnicity were predictors of a more restrictive school placement for students provided instruction with alternate curriculum compared to a traditional public day school. Lastly, results indicated that students with classifications often associated with more behavioral needs (e.g., emotional disorder) or specialized needs (e.g., orthopedic impairment) were more likely than students with intellectual disability to experience dual segregated. Implications for research and practice are discussed.