The impact of due process on the programmatic decisions of special education directors

This study is a close examination of how due process hearings in special education have influenced the programmatic decisions of special education directors in Massachusetts. This research specifically investigated whether special education directors develop programs to protect themselves from these adversarial proceedings. The study also considered several sub-questions, including: (1) Are special education directors more apt to develop programs within the regular education mainstream in response to hearings? (2) What, if any, impact does the process have on regular education? and (3) Does the impact of the process vary by type of community?;The study revealed that though few parents actually take school districts to due process hearings, many exercise their due process rights and reject educational plans. Most of the time these disputes are resolved either informally or through a state appointed mediator. Further, the study showed that, though the impact of due process varies significantly from one community to another, the threat of due process hearings influences the programmatic decisions of special education directors. Directors gave many examples of parents rejecting placement offers seeking improved services for their children within the mainstream of regular education and sometimes the influence of this advocacy extends to other children through program development. The use of due process for mainstreaming rarely results in hearings with most of these disputes resolved informally.;Due process has its greatest influence in districts where there is strong competition with private schools. Due process fosters this competition and has served as a catalyst for the development of many programs. However, this competition has resulted in the development of many segregated programs.;The study had two components: First, a document review was conducted of various sources related to hearing decisions within the state over the past five years to determine hearing trends. The second major component of the study, involved intensive interviews of twenty-eight randomly selected special education directors. These interviews focused on the role that the threat of hearings play in special education directors' decisions regarding program development and the provision of related services.