Special Education, IEPs & Inclusion FAQ
What school leaders need to know about special education — IEPs, compliance, and supporting students with disabilities.
Inclusion & Placement
Is full inclusion the best approach for all students with disabilities?
No. Inclusion is a good default for most students, and I believe in it. But the idea that 100% of students can have their needs met in a general education classroom is an extreme position. Some students need smaller, quieter, less stimulating environments to succeed. That's not anti-inclusion — it's pro-student.
Watch the video →Is it legal for a district to mandate full inclusion for all students?
Under U.S. law, no. IDEA requires that placement be an IEP team decision based on the individual student's least restrictive environment. A blanket policy of full inclusion overrides that process, which means it's illegal. Districts that say "we only do inclusion here" are breaking the law.
Watch the video →What does "least restrictive environment" actually mean?
It means the least restrictive environment that will actually work for the student — not the least restrictive environment imaginable. If a student isn't learning or is unsafe in a general education classroom, that's not their least restrictive environment. It's the wrong environment.
Watch the video →What's wrong with the saying "special education is a service, not a place"?
It's technically true but misleading. Yes, special education is a set of services. But sometimes the right service requires a specific place — a self-contained classroom, a resource room, a specialized program. Denying a student an appropriate setting because "SPED is not a place" is doing them a disservice.
Watch the video →Is the research evidence for full inclusion strong?
It may not be. Douglas Fuchs of Vanderbilt, a major researcher in this field, has published work arguing that the evidence base for inclusion is very low quality. Many studies compare students with milder needs in inclusive settings to students with more severe needs in specialized settings — which makes inclusion look better than it actually is.
Watch the video →What should the actual goal of inclusion be?
The goal has to be supporting the student's learning, not just their physical presence in the room. Inclusion without support is not inclusion — it's abandonment. If a student is sitting in a gen ed classroom without the services they need, that's not meeting their needs, and it's not what the law requires.
Watch the video →Are specialized programs the same as segregation?
No, and calling them segregation is a cheap rhetorical trick. A specialized program tailor-made to meet a student's needs is fundamentally different from racial segregation. That said, we do need to be vigilant that specialized programs don't become dumping grounds. But using the word "segregation" to shut down discussion about appropriate placement helps no one.
Watch the video →Has any jurisdiction tried 100% inclusion, and how did it go?
New Brunswick, Canada has had a mandatory full inclusion policy (Policy 322) since 2013. No jurisdiction has tried harder or done more. And their own premier and education minister have acknowledged it isn't working. If the best effort in the world can't make 100% inclusion succeed, that tells you something about the policy, not the educators.
Watch the video →IEPs & Accountability
If a student with an IEP is being violent, does the IEP prevent the school from acting?
No. No IEP says "tolerate violence." Students with IEPs have procedural protections — like manifestation determination meetings after 10 days of suspension — but those protections don't mean you can never suspend a student or change their placement. If repeated violence is occurring, the IEP is not working, and the team needs to meet and revise it.
Watch the video →What should happen when an IEP isn't working?
The IEP team needs to reconvene and make changes. A failing IEP is not a permanent plan. If a student is repeatedly violent or not learning, that's evidence that the current placement or behavior plan isn't appropriate. Tolerating failure helps no one — not the student, not the teacher, not the other students in the room.
Watch the video →Does safety or the IEP come first?
Safety comes first. Always. There's a tendency in special education to put the IEP, the FBA, and the BIP ahead of physical safety while we "try things." But in that interim, real people are getting injured — students and staff alike. Documents matter legally, but people's physical safety matters more.
Watch the video →Should every student who struggles with behavior get an IEP?
No. Behavior problems are not automatically disabilities. If consequences aren't working, the answer isn't always to start the IEP process. Most students who struggle with behavior are making choices, not manifesting a disability. Good discipline with clear expectations and consistent consequences solves most behavioral issues. Reserve IEPs for students with genuine disabilities that interfere with learning.
Watch the video →How should we think about violence from students with IEPs?
Students with IEPs deserve protections and appropriate services, but they don't deserve the right to be violent. When violence occurs, it's evidence that something in the current plan isn't working — not a reason to blame the teacher. And we have to be careful about circular reasoning that writes an IEP for every violent student and then says we can't do anything because they have an IEP.
Watch the video →Specialized Programs & Settings
Why do some students need small, specialized classes?
Some students, especially those with autism, get overstimulated in a classroom with 25 kids. No accommodation, no teacher strategy, and no number of aides can fix that. It's an environment problem. You have to actually put the student in a smaller environment for them to succeed. I've seen multiple students flourish when moved to self-contained classrooms after struggling for years in gen ed.
Watch the video →Why shouldn't districts just assign 1:1 aides instead of creating specialized programs?
Because 1:1 aides are a Band-Aid for inappropriate placements. A properly staffed specialized program — say, one teacher, two aides, and six students — is actually cheaper than giving every kid a one-on-one. And it works better educationally. Districts are handing out 1:1 aides like candy to support the ideology of full inclusion, but the aides are getting injured at astronomical rates and the students still aren't succeeding.
Watch the video →Can a general education classroom function as a therapeutic setting?
No. A general education classroom with one teacher and 20-30 students is not equipped for specialized behavioral interventions. If a student has such extreme behaviors that they can't safely be in the classroom, those behaviors need to be addressed outside the school environment first. We're not an operating room. We're not a behavioral health facility.
Watch the video →Is more teacher training the answer when students aren't succeeding?
Not always. Some students genuinely need a different environment — smaller classes, more adults, less stimulation, a different pace. No amount of professional development prepares a general education teacher to handle every student safely. Expecting training to replace appropriate placement is unfair to both the teacher and the student.
Watch the video →Behavior, Safety & Discipline
Is being anti-violence the same as being anti-student?
Not at all. Wanting safe schools protects all students, including those with disabilities. A lot of the violence we're seeing in schools comes from students being in inappropriate placements without adequate support. Being anti-violence means insisting that districts do their job and give every student the services and setting they actually need to succeed.
Watch the video →Is physical restraint ever appropriate in schools?
Yes. When a student is eloping — running out of the building, potentially into traffic — you have to be able to stop them. The extremely high bar on any physical intervention is putting students in danger. Restraint must be safe, trained, and reasonable. But the idea that we can never physically control where a young, dysregulated student goes is a recipe for tragedy.
Watch the video →What's wrong with a "calming banana" approach to violent behavior?
Everything. When a student punches a teacher and the parent's response is to send a banana to prevent hunger-related outbursts, we've lost the plot. Being slightly hungry does not make you punch someone. We have to focus on choices, not triggers. Students — including those with disabilities — need to develop personal responsibility for their actions, because the real world won't always have a banana available.
Watch the video →What function of behavior is missing from the FBA framework?
Power. The standard EATS framework — Escape, Attention, Tangible, Sensory — is useful for clinical settings. But in schools, we can't ignore that some behavior is motivated by the desire for power over others. If we tolerate violent behavior to avoid "reinforcing" an escape function, we hand the student power that makes everyone unsafe. School discipline is about maintaining a safe environment, not conducting behavioral therapy.
Watch the video →Do sensory rooms actually work?
They can, but only with proper adult management. An unsupervised sensory room becomes a place for work avoidance. Students should not be free to walk out of class whenever they want and spend unlimited time relaxing. A sensory room works best when managed by a special education aide who monitors when students truly need a break versus when they're ducking a challenge.
Watch the video →Accommodations & Over-Identification
Are accommodations for anxiety helping or hurting students?
Often hurting. Research from psychologists at Columbia's Teachers College shows that avoidance-based accommodations — no time limits, no public speaking, alternate formats — reinforce the false belief that the anxiety-provoking situation is actually dangerous. The average anxious student gets 20 accommodations, many of which teach them they can't handle challenges. Students are more capable than we assume.
Watch the video →Should we ask students whether their accommodations actually help them learn?
Yes. Often accommodations come from software defaults — it's easy to check every box. But many accommodations reduce learning rather than increase it. When you ask students directly, they often know the difference between an accommodation that helps them meet high expectations and one that just lets them avoid hard work. High expectations often make a bigger difference than accommodations.
Watch the video →Are college students faking disabilities to get accommodations?
Yes, and the research confirms it. Estimates suggest 25-50% of college-age ADHD diagnoses may not be legitimate. Students seek diagnoses for extra test time and stimulant medications. Boutique psychologists advertise 95% success rates in obtaining diagnoses. This harms students with real disabilities by diluting resources and credibility.
Watch the video →Funding & School Choice
Why can't private schools educate students for less money than public schools?
Because they're not educating the same students. Private schools can decline students with expensive special needs. Public schools educate everyone, including students who cost six figures per year for 1:1 aides, specialized programs, and adapted transportation. Any comparison that ignores this selection effect is meaningless.
Watch the video →Why are schools consistently breaking special education laws?
Funding. Idaho's funding formula assumes only 5.5-6% of students have disabilities when the real number is at least 12%. This pattern exists nationwide. Districts don't have the resources, programs, or training to meet their legal obligations. We need updated funding formulas, but we also need to avoid creating perverse incentives that turn special education into a revenue strategy.
Watch the video →