Dive Brief:
- A rise in "special-need" charter schools sparks debate over the best way to educate disabled students: Is it best to create a specialized setting or mainstream the education?
- Critics of specialized schools argue that we should strive for a society that is inclusive for those with disabilities, so sequestering students can be restrictive.
- Advocates for these schools, however, believe that they are what the charter movement is actually about: Getting a chance to attend free schools that respond to specific needs and address areas where there may be education gaps. For example, at The Arizona Autism Charter School, a specific awards-based system called ABA, which is known to be useful with disabled students, is employed.
Dive Insight:
According to the Washington-based Center for Education Reform, in the 2012 school year, there were about 100 special-needs-specific charter schools. While debates may occur about the effectiveness of these schools, one thing is certain: They help debunk the myth that charter schools do not help special needs students.
In terms of the inclusivity debate, one sticking point is the fact that the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) actually requires disabled students to be in the "least restrictive environment," which some would argue is a mixed-environment.
"Within the special education community, there's a concern about these schools—a worry that they're concentrating kids with learning disabilities into one school, and they're not interacting enough with other kids," Paul T. O'Neill, the co-founder of the National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools, told Ed Week.