From Integration to Inclusion: A History of Special Education in the 20th Century

305 Pages·2009·1.485 MB·English

by  Margret A. Winzer

From Integration
to Inclusion

From Integration
to Inclusion
A History of Special Education
in the 20th Century
Margret A. Winzer
Gallaudet University Press
Washington, DC
Gallaudet University Press
Washington, DC 20002
http://gupress.gallaudet.edu
© 2009 by Gallaudet University
All rights reserved. Published 2009
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Winzer, M. A. (Margret A.), 1940–
From integration to inclusion: a history of special education in the 20th century /
Margret A. Winzer
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN-13: 978-56368-365-7 (casebound : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 1-56368-365-2 (casebound : alk. paper)
1. Special education—United States—History—20th century. I. Title.
LC3981.W585 2009
371.90973'0904—dc22 2008051439
∞ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library
Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.
Contents
Introduction vii
Chapter 1 / Revisiting the 19th Century 1
Chapter 2 / Changing Directions 19
Chapter 3 / The Politics of Biology 45
Chapter 4 / The Development of Special Classes 77
Chapter 5 / Turning Points 105
Chapter 6 / Handling “the Holdbacks and the Drags” 129
Chapter 7 / Going to Public School 155
Chapter 8 / The Professionalization of Special Education 185
Chapter 9 / The Era of Inclusion 199
References 225
Appendix A / Chronology of Developments in
Special Education 271
Appendix B / Summary of U.S. Federal Legislation on
Special Education, 1879–2004 279
Index 286

Introduction
T
his text is designed as a comprehensive history of the fi eld that focuses
chiefl y on events in the 20th century. The key hallmarks of the book are its retro-
spective overview of the fi eld of special education, a critical assessment of past
progress and reform, and an analysis of the theoretical diversity within the dis-
cipline. The text accomplishes these elements by offering a description, analy-
sis, and audit of the history; by highlighting the major paradigms that have both
emerged from and shaped special education; by describing the reform movements
that have periodically shaken the whole of education, the fi eld of special educa-
tion, or have applied to discrete groups of exceptionality; and by examining the
issues and debates that have arisen within the fi eld of special education in the
twentieth century.
In another sense, the text is prospective. It anchors present experiences to the
past and details the forces that have led to today’s issues and controversies. There
is no question that many of today’s most contentious issues have plagued the fi eld
from the outset. But joined to long-standing dilemmas, many issues have acquired
a new urgency in the light of current school reform movements. Critical areas
include, but are not restricted to, inclusive education for students with disabilities;
over- and underrepresentation in special education; techniques and methods to
provide safe and caring schools; new genetic discoveries that are revamping the
fi eld of intellectual disabilities; the recent marriage of special education and the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Associa-
tion, 1994, 2000); the subsequent tendency to label and categorize children with
overwhelming detail; the push toward high-stakes testing and accountability; and
the stress on science-based methods to both inform current issues and close the
gap between research and practice.
In a completely different sense, it is hoped that the text is persuasive. As a
fi eld, special education occupies contested terrain: it is both hailed and con-
demned. Yet, not only its defenders but also its critics often are unaware of histori-
cal developments. North American special educators seem curiously disinterested
in the foundations of their fi eld. Historical perspectives, foundational matters,
vii
viii Introduction
and theoretical stances are often ignored or historical knowledge is learned inci-
dentally and unintentionally (Mostert & Crockett, 1999–2000; Winzer, 2004). For
many researchers and practitioners, the immediate demands of the present tend to
occlude a broader historical and philosophical scope. They look more favorably at
proposals for practical solutions to immediate problems and prefer to devise stud-
ies and collect data on the lived worlds of schools and teachers.
Some special educators speak to a lack of history. Others rapidly dispose of their
heritage; they suggest that we “pause and refl ect but not too long” (Will, 1984, p.
11). There are some who actively reject the history of the fi eld and lean toward dis-
paraging earlier events, programs, and pioneers in favor of contemporary models.
In doing so, they chronicle the vicissitudes of special education, point to supposed
fossilized traditions, and are uncompromisingly critical of past endeavors. To oth-
ers, history becomes increasingly selective, with the past made over to suit present
intentions: they pull out the odd snippet, often to justify favored policy initiatives.
Some people in the fi eld tend to view special education as second rate and
demeaning of those it serves: they sieze the moral high ground and lash out with
indignation at what they consider to be the injustices of the past. They deride pio-
neer practitioners as culpable in not granting people with disabilities dignity and
equality, and they contrast the best and most effective of contemporary treatments
with the worst of the past to create a dark and distorted vision. Those holding
these perspectives not only view the past as intrinsically worse than the present
but also see the future as likely to be more positive than the present. Related to this
perspective is the contention that today’s inclusive reform brings a new and more
powerful understanding that is incompatible with past practices. This argument
leads to the simple assertion that if the current movement to include students with
special needs in schools and communities embodies the best ideals of social jus-
tice, then the past, by extension, had to be unjust.
Inherent in these positions is a steadfast unwillingness to learn from the wis-
dom of the accumulated past, a confi rmation of Blatt’s observation that “in this fi eld
we call special education, history has not served us well. We have not learned from
it” (Blatt, 1975, p. 404). Yet, no matter how persuasive the current reforms, the notion
that special education can ignore its past is unsustainable: the fi eld cannot afford to
dismiss or denigrate the forces that have shaped contemporary understandings.
Robert Osgood (1997) wrote that the emergence of special education as a fi rmly
entrenched arm of public schooling has constituted a remarkable story in the history
of American education in the 20th century. Yet from whatever route it is approached,
the history of special education is not a simple tale. Nor is it merely a story of prog-
ress culminating in a better state of affairs. Rather, it is a complex thread that weaves
in and out of a much broader social and educational tapestry. To be sure, the history
is incomplete and sometimes confusing. It is also fascinating and important: how
and why special education evolved to this point not only provides special educators
with a sense of their own history but also adumbrates enduring dilemmas.
Rather than disassociate from the past, special education needs to refl ect on its
history, revisit the theoretical underpinnings of the profession, and appreciate the
subtle ways in which particular contentions have been woven together to generate
arguments for a particular ideological stance. Those interested in the fi eld need to
Introduction ix
assume a balanced stance that considers the progress to date, the social and politi-
cal context of development, and the past innovations on which today’s enterprise
rests. They should examine evolving practice within its social context to illustrate
the general shift in attitudes couched in eras of social reform and to show that the
resolutions of special education do not emerge out of social vacuum, but within a
particular social space that is fi lled by the interplay of history, knowledge, interest,
and power. The fi eld should celebrate the varied reforms; the mosaic of concepts,
approaches, and models that have developed and that inform our current work;
and the contributions—both philosophical and pragmatic—of the brilliant, inno-
vative, often controversial and erratic pioneers. Ethical philosophies and social
movements are the products of the experience of members of a society living in
a particular time, and the attempts of the pioneers in the fi eld of special educa-
tion to transcend these socially and culturally set limitations deserve careful and
respectful study. In a more practical vein, distinguished pioneers have provided a
legacy and a “heritage rich with lessons abundantly able to inform contemporary
issues in special education, particularly those related to intervention” (Mostert &
Crockett, 1999–2000, p. 134).
Equally compelling is the contention that engagement with some of the ten-
sions and dilemmas that characterize the history of special education illuminates
current contentions, debates, and developments. Historical inquiry elucidates stra-
tegically signifi cant issues and, as such, forms a vital component of the struggle to
understand the ideologies and practices that have developed in special education
over a span of more than two centuries.
Certainly, new assumptions and understandings may work to mitigate histor-
ical traditions, and a consideration of the historical background is not a guarantee
that we will not repeat our mistakes. Further, as Polloway (1984) observed, “the
nature of schools, teachers, and students today would make any attempt at direct
generalization . . . an extremely doubtful practice” (p. 24). Even with these limita-
tions, lessons from the past can illuminate contemporary dilemmas, offer guidance
to current issues, and illustrate enduring patterns. Alan Dyson (2001) succinctly
noted that in the fi eld of special education, there is much reinvention of the wheel,
with more focus on the structure of the wheel than on the reasons why wheels go
around. The wheel may be renamed, somewhat adapted, and applied to differ-
ent groups or scenarios, but basically it is a reincarnation of an already invented
wheel. Pursuing this theme, “much of the fi eld’s repeated wanderings and cyclical
lurches could be steadied by anchoring present and future innovations in what we
have already learned from our past” (Mostert & Crockett, 1999–2000, p. 137).
APPROACHING A HISTORY OF SPECIAL EDUCATION
The historical literature in the area of special education is narrow and special-
ized. Save perhaps for the history of deaf education, there is so little comprehen-
sive research that historical development remains a relatively unexplored cul-de-
sac within the history of education.