The Uncertainties of Educating a Preschooler With Special Needs: Who Makes the Important Determinations? And, Who Should?

• Publication year: 2011
• Citation: Vol. 10 No. 1

§ Fall / Winter 2011- #16. The Uncertainties of Educating a Preschooler with Special Needs: Who Makes the Important Determinations? And, Who Should?

Washington Seattle Journal For Social Justice
Volume 10, No. 16
Fall / Winter 2011

The Uncertainties of Educating a Preschooler with Special Needs: Who Makes the Important Determinations? And, Who Should?

Kathryn A. Kuhlenberg(fn*)

I. INTRODUCTION

Quinn is a bright, outgoing, fun-loving three-and-a-half-year-old little boy.(fn1) Like most children his age, he is enrolled in a preschool program that is meant to prepare him for kindergarten.(fn2) Quinn had been attending his privately run preschool program for about a year when Quinn's teachers began to notice some behavioral, sensitivity, and anxiety characteristics that alarmed them. They referred Quinn and his parents to the local education agency (LEA), more commonly known as a "school district," for an evaluation. The LEA concluded that Quinn qualified to receive services through its state-run and federally funded special education program. The LEA outlined the services Quinn should receive in his individual education plan (lEP). These services were meant to close the developmental gap between Quinn and his peers.

Quinn's parents were concerned for their son, but they were very happy that he would now be able to get the services he needed. They contacted the school to work out the logistics of Quinn's services, but were instead confronted with a troubling choice. The school informed Quinn's parents that in order to receive the services outlined in his lEP, he would need to leave his current preschool to attend the district-run preschool. Quinn's parents were concerned for their son, as Quinn had experienced many challenges adjusting to his current preschool, but after a year he was comfortable and happy with his teachers and peers and, most importantly, making progress socially, emotionally, and academically. Moreover, Quinn's first preschool was specifically chosen for him based on his parents' preferences and views on what would be the best option for their son's education. Quinn's parents had looked at the district preschool in the past and chose not to enroll Quinn for a number of reasons-but they gave it one more chance and took Quinn to spend the day to see how he liked it. Quinn was anxious for most of the day. It was very difficult for the teachers to communicate with him and for him to connect with the teachers or his peers. For most of the time, he hid under the tables. Needless to say, Quinn's parents did not think it was a good fit for their son or their family.

Quinn's parents now face an enormous dilemma: Do they send Quinn to a new school that they do not really like and where he is uncomfortable in order to receive the services that he needs? Or, do they forgo special education services and keep Quinn in his current setting-one that was specifically chosen for him and in which he is thriving?

There is a classic and inherent tension in state-run education systems between the rights of parents to direct the education of their children and the rights of the state to direct the education of its citizens.(fn3) Compulsory education laws and a few major US Supreme Court decisions(fn4) have addressed this tension as it applies to most of the school-age population,(fn5)but these laws and decisions do not typically extend to preschool education.

Because of this, parents almost exclusively control the education of their preschool-aged children with little or no state interference.(fn6) Even when there are laws that address preschool education, there is no clear direction for how to address issues unique to preschool settings.

For example, under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the federal government mandates that schools receiving federal funds identify and serve all children ages three to five who qualify for special education services.(fn7) The IDEA also requires that all eligible children be provided a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE), which means that the child should be educated with nondisabled peers to the greatest extent possible.(fn8) However, determining the LRE for a preschooler is a difficult task because there is no "typical" education setting for preschoolers equal to that of the primary and secondary levels.(fn9) Instead, there are several different preschool settings that may adequately prepare children for kindergarten.(fn10) In addition, when determining the LRE for a preschooler who qualifies for special education services, there is uncertainty as to whether the parents or the school should be making such a determination. These issues create uncertainty as to how situations like the one faced by Quinn's parents should be resolved.

Preschool special education is fraught with uncertainties like those presented above. As a result, parents and schools inevitably must face and make many tough decisions. Specifically, what is the LRE and who makes that determination? Parents have retained much freedom of choice in the education of their children at the preschool level, but if the school is solely responsible for determining the LRE, then parents are necessarily stripped of the right to choose how, when, where, and if their child attends preschool. Does acceptance of an lEP remove from the parent that freedom of choice? And, if so, should it? Early childhood education and intervention is pivotal in the development of children and can have a huge impact on children's later educational success, especially for special education students. (fn11) Because early childhood education can have such a massive effect on the individual, the family, and the school, it does not make sense to give either the state or the parent total control. Thus, Congress can best address this issue by amending the IDEA to include either a clear set of standards for determining when a specific preschool will be suitable for delivering special education services or a requirement that states adopt clear standards that do the same.

This article addresses some of these ambiguities and explores the tension between parents and the state at the preschool level. First, it presents and analyzes competing theories regarding parent versus state control of education, with a broad, more philosophical focus. Second, it provides a brief history of the federal system of special education in the United States, focusing specifically on the three- to five-year-old preschool age group. Then, it provides a more in-depth discussion, using relevant information and arguments from the previous sections, of the special education issues that arise in the unique system of preschool. The article also addresses the importance of early childhood education, especially in the special education context, to make clear that a solution to the issues presented is both necessary and desirable. Finally, it makes informed recommendations on how the IDEA should be amended to account for both parental and state interests in order to clear up the uncertainties that currently exist.

II. Who Should Direct and Control Education?

This fundamental question lies at the heart of Quinn's dilemma. As federal and state governments have become increasingly involved in the education process, this question has become more prevalent and complex. First, there exists a philosophical argument regarding the ever-present tension between parents and the state in controlling education. This argument is especially applicable in democratic states because of the extreme importance of education in a democratic society. There is also a legal argument regarding the right to care, custody, and control of one's child-as recognized by the federal judiciary-and the interaction of this right with public education to consider. Although neither the philosophy nor the cases are directly tied to preschool special education, each illustrates the tension between the rights of parents and the state in directing education. The philosophical argument analyzes this tension in the broadest sense because it considers the ideal balance for a democratic state. The cases and legal arguments illustrate that courts can address controversies as they arise to provide relief for individuals, and sometimes classes of people, through which common law and precedents are created. But, the philosophical and legal arguments are not sufficient to resolve the ambiguities that continue to exist. The common law and legal precedents are inconsistent, and judgments sometimes directly contradict one another. Similarly, great philosophers and legal minds have been unable to discern static boundaries regarding where the parents' rights end and where the states' rights begin, and the debate has been a constant fixture in the education community.(fn12)

A. The Importance of Education in a Democratic Society-A Philosophical Argument

The philosophical argument regarding the need and importance of education in a democratic society can be traced back to the roots of democracy itself: ancient Greece. In fact, the Spartans were one of the first societies to impose a system of public education on their youth.(fn13) The Spartan government removed boys from the home at age seven to live and learn in the public education system(fn14) because the Spartan education system's goal was to create a "well-drilled military machine composed of...