NEPC Review: 'Outmatched: Special Education Can't Solve Problems Rooted in the Education Delivery System' (Center on Reinventing Public Education, October 2025)
Saved in:
| Title: | NEPC Review: 'Outmatched: Special Education Can't Solve Problems Rooted in the Education Delivery System' (Center on Reinventing Public Education, October 2025) |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Federico R. Waitoller, University of Colorado at Boulder, National Education Policy Center (NEPC) |
| Source: | National Education Policy Center. 2026. |
| Availability: | National Education Policy Center. School of Education 249 UCB University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309. Tel: 303-735-5290; e-mail: nepc@colorado.edu; Web site: http://nepc.colorado.edu |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 13 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice |
| Document Type: | Reports - Evaluative Opinion Papers |
| Descriptors: | Special Education, Students with Disabilities, Educational Trends, Disability Identification, Educational Legislation, Equal Education, Federal Legislation, Achievement Gap, Educational Needs, Research Methodology, Misconceptions, Psychological Evaluation, Accountability, Educational Quality, Student Rights |
| Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers: | Individuals with Disabilities Education Act |
| Abstract: | While special education in the U.S. has made significant achievements in terms of civil rights and educational equity, many critics have identified inequities in terms of labeling, segregation, and low academic expectations. A new report published by the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE) opens an initiative to restructure special education. It argues that increased special education identifications and persistent achievement gaps reflect the failure of a general education system built for uniformity rather than diversity. It concludes that, as a result of this uniformity, special education serves as a default mechanism for unmet instructional needs, and it calls for replacing the dual general/special education structure with a unified, needs-based system. The report, however, has several major weaknesses. Its rationale rests on broad claims about systemic design flaws, but it provides only limited descriptive statistics and selectively uses research literature. Moreover, while the report accurately identifies very real problems, such as reliance on psychological evaluations and inequitable access to services, it provides no empirical evidence linking these systemic features to rising identification rates or widening achievement gaps. Also, because it only selectively uses research, it overlooks decades of scholarship on identification, disproportionality, and system design, while failing to engage with counterarguments that defend special education as a necessary specialized system. The report's recommendations are bold but are not empirically grounded, leaving unanswered questions about legal protections, expertise, accountability, and instructional quality for students with disabilities. As such, this report provides little direct guidance for developing or revising policy in ways that would reliably safeguard the rights and learning needs of students with disabilities. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | ED681179 |
| Database: | ERIC |
Be the first to leave a comment!
