WITHIN WALLS: THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS PROVIDED FOR EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED AND LEARNING DISABLED INSTITUTIONALIZED CHILDREN

Public Law 94-142 recognized the handicapped child's right to a public education. The 1975 mandate culminated two decades of struggle for equal educational opportunity. It applied to all educationally handicapped children, no matter their school setting. The institutionalized child was guaranteed an education equal to public school programs.;Public school handicapped programs are monitored for PL 94-142 compliance; litigation continues over the educational neglect of the institutionalized mentally retarded child. The institutionalized emotionally disturbed child going to school in a Residential Child Care Facility (RCCF) receives little attention.;The research problem for this study became: Are there substantive differences in the educational programs provided institutionalized emotionally disturbed children identified as handicapped under the provisions of PL 94-142 and children in the same institutions not so identified?;Data were collected in a three and a half month field study, employing the methodology of participant observation. The research was conducted at two state licensed RCCFs. Among site selection criteria were that they be professionally respected, provide education in an on grounds school, and maintain a staff representative of RCCFs comparable in size and sophistication. Subjects were 65 children, ranging in age from 12 to 18, and the staff members who served them.;The study found no differences between the educational programs of handicapped and non handicapped children. At one site, identification of an educational handicap was lost at admission; all children were educated as non handicapped. At the second site, all children were ultimately identified as handicapped, receiving special education prior to formal identification.;The two sites stated similar institutional goals but approached them in different ways, apparent in administrative styles, socialization norms, and institutional receptivity to change. Service to children reflected the differences.;The public school histories of RCCF children revealed failure and educational neglect. Because of the demands presented by the children they teach, RCCF teachers need rigorous and specific preservice training.;The impetus behind recent state efforts to bring RCCF educational programs into compliance with PL 94-142 is reduced funding, not concern for handicapped children's rights. Politics and money dictate to society's conscience in determining its priority for serving children.