In this week’s newsletter, I discuss the etymology and historical context of the word “neurodiverse.” This term is a new-ish word used to describe those with any type of neurological difference which often results in a learning difference, behaviors outside the social norms, and/or diverse interactions and use of the spoken and written language. The term has been integrated into the daily lexicon over the past 20 years, especially in the field of education.
The first legislation related to guaranteeing the right to a public education was passed in 1975 as the “Education for All Handicapped Children Act or PL 94-142 (U.S. Congress, 1975). This law is what is called “FAPE” in the world of public education, which is an acronym for the right of every US citizen to have access to a “free and appropriate public education.” This law also gave education the acronyms “LRE” and “IEP,” which are “least restrictive environment” and “individualized education plan” respectively.
PL 94-142 created a list of 13 eligible disabilities that schools and educators are required to accommodate within the public system. The law also requires educators to modify curriculums to meet the needs of these students. As with all laws in the US, the interpretations of the enforcement of the law vary and the Supreme Court has heard multiple cases that have created precedents related to the education of students with disabilities.
In 1984, the Reagan administration attempted to shift enforcement of the federal law to the states (Gordon, 1982). Part of the issue for the Reagan administration was mostly related to federal funding. Education is a state issue, but PL 94-142 had created funding from the federal government for specific programs related to meeting the expectation of the law (Gordon, 1982). The changes proposed by Reagan were reductions in parental involvement, a reduction in FAPE, and a reduction in funding (Gordon, 1982). This was actually a compromise as Reagan sought to repeal the law completely in 1981 (Gordon, 1982).
At the time, the federal government footed the bill for 40% of the additional costs to educate students with disabilities for all states except New Mexico(Gordon, 1982). The administration was also critical of students being placed in programs without a disability (Gordon, 1982). The 5,000 letters written by parents maintained the law as it was written in 1975 (Gordon, 1982). Just to give you an idea of how far we have actually come, the New York Times article referenced in this paragraph contains the sentence “ Special education has also benefited normal children, according to some observers.”(Gordon, 1982).
Currently clutching my pearls. Just kidding. I do actually own some pearls from the 80s though.
Also, as an 80s baby, I am also very much aware of the drastic shifts in gifted education during this era. My source on this uses the sentence “The first tension was around whether gifted children should be a national or an international resource” (Crane, 2020). More pearl clutching? Maybe that’s why they were so popular…there was a lot to clutch about.
Contextually, this does unfortunately make sense. The 1980s was one of the more complex eras related to the Cold War. One of the theories was to find gifted children and create specialized education so that we can identify who would be able to help with defeating the Soviet Union (US Congress, 1958). That is a poor summary of the details, but I don’t have the time or ability to create a training montage worthy of this battle in the educational field.
I wonder if Sylvester Stallone is available for a shoot? I know William Zabka and Ralph Macchio may have some extra time on their hands now that the ultimate conclusion of Johnny versus Daniel is officially released to the world. What a great gift those two gave us. That break was purposeful because my next observation is difficult to accept.
Essentially, the changes to education in the 80s can be compared to a social engineering- type approach:- find the smart ones and spend time and money on them while reducing the time and money spent on students who would not aid in the “betterment of America.” That’s not a quote of anything, but it is my personal assessment of what was happening. Luckily, the wall fell, Rocky won, and so did education for everyone.
In 1990, the first version of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was passed (US Congress, 1990). IDEA 1990 introduced the idea of inclusion (US Congress, 1990). The previous decades version of FAPE was to have a special wing of the school for the special kids (US Congress, 1990). It also gave parents more of a voice in the education of their child as well as an evaluation protocol to create fair and comprehensive assessments of students eligibility and needs (US Congress, 1990). It also expanded federal funding for these programs (US Congress, 1990).
2004 saw another change for IDEA that increased accountability measures regarding the educators fidelity within the programs (US Congress, 2004). All students gained a new right, which is intervention as a method to increase early interventions and support before shifting a student into special education (US Congress, 2004). Flexibility, data gathering, and parental access to student records were also addressed (US Congress, 2004). One of the most dramatic changes was the inclusion of behavior as manifestations of a student’s disability and a procedure to assess and create behavior management plans as part of a student’s IEP (US Congress, 2004). And of course, more funding (US Congress, 2004).
IDEA changes in 2008 were related to more emphasis on early interventions, updated procedural safeguards in the wake of several court cases, and more flexibility for states (US Congress, 2008). The Every Students Achieve Act of 2015 focuses on state accountability systems, equality in education, and more collaboration between teachers specialized in exceptional student education and the general classroom educators (US Congress, 2015).
The most impactful part of ESSA is the addition of a transition plan for students exiting the public education system and entering the adult world (US Congress, 2015). States are working out the interpretations of that part of ESSA, but essentially, students with disabilities are informed of their rights as an adult and must sign consent for their parents to access their educational records and participate in the IEP. Transition plans also require students to attend meetings, but the ages vary. In Florida, students turning 12 are required to be invited to their meetings in order to have input (Florida Statutes, 2015).
As with all rights movements, it just takes time. The vocabulary associated with special education is still in its infancy and while my children regularly say “back in the 1900s, 1975 wasn’t really that long ago. And as medical diagnosis and psychology expand their understanding of neurodiversity, education follows along behind. The good news is that it is following and I am excited about the first students educated under IDEA 2008 entering the work force and post-secondary education programs. Diversity creates richness in a society and hiding it is always a horrible scar on the complex tapestry of history. Keep pushing forward towards a greater future based in education, which in my opinion is the key to human acceptance and understanding of each other.
The first legislation related to guaranteeing the right to a public education was passed in 1975 as the “Education for All Handicapped Children Act or PL 94-142 (U.S. Congress, 1975). This law is what is called “FAPE” in the world of public education, which is an acronym for the right of every US citizen to have access to a “free and appropriate public education.” This law also gave education the acronyms “LRE” and “IEP,” which are “least restrictive environment” and “individualized education plan” respectively.
PL 94-142 created a list of 13 eligible disabilities that schools and educators are required to accommodate within the public system. The law also requires educators to modify curriculums to meet the needs of these students. As with all laws in the US, the interpretations of the enforcement of the law vary and the Supreme Court has heard multiple cases that have created precedents related to the education of students with disabilities.
In 1984, the Reagan administration attempted to shift enforcement of the federal law to the states (Gordon, 1982). Part of the issue for the Reagan administration was mostly related to federal funding. Education is a state issue, but PL 94-142 had created funding from the federal government for specific programs related to meeting the expectation of the law (Gordon, 1982). The changes proposed by Reagan were reductions in parental involvement, a reduction in FAPE, and a reduction in funding (Gordon, 1982). This was actually a compromise as Reagan sought to repeal the law completely in 1981 (Gordon, 1982).
At the time, the federal government footed the bill for 40% of the additional costs to educate students with disabilities for all states except New Mexico(Gordon, 1982). The administration was also critical of students being placed in programs without a disability (Gordon, 1982). The 5,000 letters written by parents maintained the law as it was written in 1975 (Gordon, 1982). Just to give you an idea of how far we have actually come, the New York Times article referenced in this paragraph contains the sentence “ Special education has also benefited normal children, according to some observers.”(Gordon, 1982).
Currently clutching my pearls. Just kidding. I do actually own some pearls from the 80s though.
Also, as an 80s baby, I am also very much aware of the drastic shifts in gifted education during this era. My source on this uses the sentence “The first tension was around whether gifted children should be a national or an international resource” (Crane, 2020). More pearl clutching? Maybe that’s why they were so popular…there was a lot to clutch about.
Contextually, this does unfortunately make sense. The 1980s was one of the more complex eras related to the Cold War. One of the theories was to find gifted children and create specialized education so that we can identify who would be able to help with defeating the Soviet Union (US Congress, 1958). That is a poor summary of the details, but I don’t have the time or ability to create a training montage worthy of this battle in the educational field.
I wonder if Sylvester Stallone is available for a shoot? I know William Zabka and Ralph Macchio may have some extra time on their hands now that the ultimate conclusion of Johnny versus Daniel is officially released to the world. What a great gift those two gave us. That break was purposeful because my next observation is difficult to accept.
Essentially, the changes to education in the 80s can be compared to a social engineering- type approach:- find the smart ones and spend time and money on them while reducing the time and money spent on students who would not aid in the “betterment of America.” That’s not a quote of anything, but it is my personal assessment of what was happening. Luckily, the wall fell, Rocky won, and so did education for everyone.
In 1990, the first version of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was passed (US Congress, 1990). IDEA 1990 introduced the idea of inclusion (US Congress, 1990). The previous decades version of FAPE was to have a special wing of the school for the special kids (US Congress, 1990). It also gave parents more of a voice in the education of their child as well as an evaluation protocol to create fair and comprehensive assessments of students eligibility and needs (US Congress, 1990). It also expanded federal funding for these programs (US Congress, 1990).
2004 saw another change for IDEA that increased accountability measures regarding the educators fidelity within the programs (US Congress, 2004). All students gained a new right, which is intervention as a method to increase early interventions and support before shifting a student into special education (US Congress, 2004). Flexibility, data gathering, and parental access to student records were also addressed (US Congress, 2004). One of the most dramatic changes was the inclusion of behavior as manifestations of a student’s disability and a procedure to assess and create behavior management plans as part of a student’s IEP (US Congress, 2004). And of course, more funding (US Congress, 2004).
IDEA changes in 2008 were related to more emphasis on early interventions, updated procedural safeguards in the wake of several court cases, and more flexibility for states (US Congress, 2008). The Every Students Achieve Act of 2015 focuses on state accountability systems, equality in education, and more collaboration between teachers specialized in exceptional student education and the general classroom educators (US Congress, 2015).
The most impactful part of ESSA is the addition of a transition plan for students exiting the public education system and entering the adult world (US Congress, 2015). States are working out the interpretations of that part of ESSA, but essentially, students with disabilities are informed of their rights as an adult and must sign consent for their parents to access their educational records and participate in the IEP. Transition plans also require students to attend meetings, but the ages vary. In Florida, students turning 12 are required to be invited to their meetings in order to have input (Florida Statutes, 2015).
As with all rights movements, it just takes time. The vocabulary associated with special education is still in its infancy and while my children regularly say “back in the 1900s, 1975 wasn’t really that long ago. And as medical diagnosis and psychology expand their understanding of neurodiversity, education follows along behind. The good news is that it is following and I am excited about the first students educated under IDEA 2008 entering the work force and post-secondary education programs. Diversity creates richness in a society and hiding it is always a horrible scar on the complex tapestry of history. Keep pushing forward towards a greater future based in education, which in my opinion is the key to human acceptance and understanding of each other.
References
Created with
