Search results

Current Issues and Trends in Special Education is divided into two volumes, namely, Volume 19: Identification, Assessment and Instruction and Volume 20: Research, Technology, and Teacher Preparation. The field of special education constantly changes as a result of legislation, new instructional formats and current research investigations. It can be difficult for general and special educators, school counselors and psychologists, administrators, and practicing clinicians to keep up with these changes and be current in all areas relating to special education. The special education literature knowledge base should reflect these changes; however, there is no current resource that effectively and comprehensively does this. The purpose of Current Issues and Trends in Special Education is to fulfill this void.

Despite serious debates regarding different methods for preparing special education teachers (e.g., alternative routes, distance education, and programs with traditional student teaching), most supporters of teacher education agree on the importance of professional teaching standards as an underlying framework for defining professionalism in teacher preparation programs. For example, in a national survey of special education alternative route teacher preparation programs, Rosenberg, Boyer, Sindelar, and Misra (2007) found that the majority of respondents indicated their programs were designed around professional teaching standards, particularly standards developed by the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. The CEC, the leading professional organization for special educators, disseminates professional standards for beginning and advanced special educators that have been approved by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) (Council for Exceptional Children, 2004). Specific areas addressed by the CEC professional standards include (1) foundations of special education, (2) development and characteristics of learners, (3) individual learning differences, (4) instructional strategies, (5) learning environments and social interactions, (6) communication, (7) instructional planning, (8) assessment, (9) professional and ethical practice, and (10) collaboration. These standards include the core knowledge and skills essential for effective special educators and serve as guiding principles for professional programs and state licensing departments. They ensure that special educators are well prepared to enter the practice of teaching. Teacher preparation programs should be the vehicle through which professional standards are taught, understood, and translated into practice.

The concept of transition and preparation for adult life has been an important yet controversial governmental initiative since the early 1980s. This governmental focus prompted special educators to develop and implement curricula to better prepare students with disabilities for adult life (Price, Gerber, & Mulligan, 2007). The curricula process involves forming linkages among local educational agencies and other human service agencies, including employment and training, adult services, leisure and recreation, and health and rehabilitation. Educators and policy makers continue to encounter great challenges to building capacity and sustained implementation of the transition curricula process at both the local school and the community levels.

This brings us to the question of the extent of the problem and how it might be alleviated. Well, because it is widely accepted that those who live in glasshouses should not throw stones, I shall be careful with my analysis of the problems associated with mastering English. In addition to English, I speak five languages. The adjustments I make on a daily basis to retain fluency in these non-English languages are quite tedious. Nevertheless, I have learnt to use these languages for situational purposes. I suppose students desiring to master English ought to do the opposite when it comes to embracing English and mastering its component. Should they choose to do so, they stand a good chance of reaping the benefits of mastering English in the United States or globally. Statistics and documented evidence shows that US immigrants who devote time and space to mastering English stand a good chance of enhancing their education and securing employment (see Miller & Ward, 2005). This is true because the United States is not yet a bilingual nation. Furthermore, documented evidence shows teachers in most American schools are working hard at implementing new approaches and methods that will help immigrant children and students in schools to succeed (see Ramakrishan, 2002). This is a positive sign for education in the United States. English is the language of commerce and the language that is used to educate the world when literature is disseminated at major international circuits and business transactions. As such, it is important that we make its usage and mastery a pivotal part of the education immigrant students receive irrespective of ethnic background. To provide key factors for my reasons, I will reference critical points made by teachers, politicians, writers, lawmakers, and educators concerning the mastery of English and the immigrant population in the United States. Much as I am interested in explaining why and how the mastery of English will help to enhance education for non-English-speaking immigrants, I am also interested in explaining why they need to master English.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines transition as “a passing or passage from one condition, action, or (rarely) place, to another; change.” This definition captures the essence of the transition as experienced by youth and young adults with disabilities as they move from school to postschool settings. Additionally, the definition also raises the issue that transition encompasses the existential experience not only of passing from one condition (of being a student/child to becoming a graduate/an adult) but also of the physical movement/passage (from school services to adult services) and the change therein. This chapter begins by providing a brief historical framing of transition both from the standpoint of legal foundations of transition and the findings from early research on the postschool outcomes experienced by graduates of special education. In addition, the impact of those findings is discussed regarding the formulation and articulation of transition as a mandated element in the educational planning for students with disabilities at the secondary level. Next, the chapter reviews the initial models of transition that were developed and/or proposed as a way for meeting the needs of secondary age students with disabilities as identified in research. The essential elements of transition expressed in the transition definition provided by Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 and subsequent amendments are then described. A discussion of issues related to the best and promising practices in transition concludes the chapter.

Multiculturalism, in theory and practice, has become an important educational phenomenon in today's schools, colleges, and universities. It seeks inclusive avenues that equalize opportunities for all individuals (Sue, 2004). To a large measure, it incorporates multiple voices, including those of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) persons and communities in solving local, national, and global problems. As it appears, CLD learners are the majority in some of the largest school districts in the United States (Grossman, 1995, 1998; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Obiakor, 2004; Obiakor & Beachum, 2005). For instance, Ladson-Billings (1994) noted that these learners “represent 30 percent of the public school population. In the twenty largest school districts, they makeup over 70 percent of total school enrollment” (p. x). This revelation is particularly important today, especially because the composition of educational professionals and service providers still does not reflect the changing cultural and linguistic compositions of children in schools (Obiakor, 2007, 2008). At some levels, rather than progressive measures of desegregation, we are seeing retrogressive measures of resegregation. While this might not be a necessarily bad idea for some urban schools, the progressive goals of the 1954 Brown versus the School Board of Education in Topeka, Kansas case have somehow failed (Obiakor & Utley, 2004).