I see a certain sense that people want it both ways regarding°hard word Special Education.
As°hard word I see it, there should be a binary°hard word distinction°hard word.
Either: you are in the general education classroom°hard word.
Or: you are in Special Education.
----
The problem is that we have parents who, on the one hand, request Special Education services ... but, on the other hand, demand°hard word placement°hard word in the General Education classroom°hard word.
These are both mandated°hard word by the IDEA. They are contradictory°hard word mandates°hard word.
----
For many students°hard word, there is not°hard word a need for full-time°hard word Special Education. The student°hard word can spend°hard word 80% of their time in General Education, and 20% in Special Education. ⚙️ both accelerated°hard word / honors°hard word courses and remedial°hard word courses would fit this pattern
For other students°hard word, there is a need for full-time°hard word Special Education.
----
When there is a conflict°hard word regarding°hard word the time spent°hard word in Special Education, the default°hard word outcome°hard word should be that no time is spent°hard word in the General Education classroom°hard word, if there is a colorable°hard word argument that the student's°hard word presence harms°hard word other student's°hard word educational°hard word outcomes°hard word. 🔥 this raises a perilous°hard word question: if it is found°hard word that the presence of a disruptive°hard word / violent student°hard word in a classroom°hard word was beneficial°hard word to other students'°hard word educational°hard word outcomes°hard word, would it be incumbent°hard word on the State to allow or engineer such situations?