Why We Can't Wait?
Implications of Public Law 94-142 for Recreation and Park Personnel and Programs

by Carol Ann Peterson, Ed.D.

INTRODUCTION

Legislation dealing with handicapped individuals and special education has been noticeable for the past decade. Slow, but continuous progress has been made toward the goal of equal educational opportunity for the handicapped, despite many barriers such as attitudes, funding, accessible facilities and professional preparation. Education for handicapped has now come of age, primarily through one piece of legislation which has far reaching implications for many professional fields.

On November 28, 1975, President Ford signed into law the "Education For All Handicapped Childrens Act" (P.L. 94-142). This piece of legislation in effect mandates a free and appropriate public education to all school age children. It is, however, directed specifically toward the countless handicapped individuals who have been denied public education because of the severity of their condition or place of residency, e.g. state institutions, nursing homes, etc.

OVERVIEW OF THE LAW

The major points of interest and concern are summarized below.

Full Service. States must provide a free and appropriate public education to all handicapped school age children by September, 1978.

"Children" includes handicapped individuals between the ages of three to twenty-one. There is no doubt in this writers opinion, that this extension of school years will provide (even dictate) the need and opportunity for "leisure education" within school curriculums and as part of the regular school day.

The phrase, "all handicapped children" has some new definitions and implications. Previous legislation enabled loose interpretation of the law and as a result selected disabilities were specified and served to the exclusion of others. Most severely and multiply handicapped were eliminated from program consideration. It was as though a severe limitation erased the right of the child to be a part of the human race. The new law does not define handicap by level, degree, or type.

All children whether mentally retarded, learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, orthopedically, neurologically, visually or audiotorically impaired are insured the right to have a free and appropriate education. Nor does the law limit the delivery of services to just the school setting. Children will be served whether they are in their homes, hospitals, or in institutions. The concept of "education" being synonymous with a specific building is thus obliterated.

Special Education. Special Education has been defined by authors of PL.94-142 as ". . . specially designed instruction, at no cost to parents or guardians, to meet the unique needs of a handicapped child, including classroom instruction, instruction in physical education, home instruction and instruction in hospitals and institutions."¹

The first notable item in this definition is the inclusion of physical education as a requirement under the law. This phenomena does not even occur in most educational programs for non-handicapped children. The importance of this area of instruction is rarely refuted, especially for young children in the developmental years. However, the reality of good, basic movement experience is often denied or absent. P.L. 94-142 protects the right of handicapped children to developmental physical activity, as well as the right to acquire physical ability skills for leisure utilization.

Another aspect of this definition relates to instruction in a variety of settings. Of primary interest is the institutional setting. Previous to this point in time, children residing in large state institutions for the retarded for example, received little or no attention that could be considered anything but "custodial care." Under the new law, these individuals are entitled to the same opportunities for education that their counterparts living in the community would receive.

We are just beginning to understand the nature of mental retardation and to date the evidence supports the fact that the severely handicapped can learn and develop. The problem in the past has been lack of funds and time as well as the absence of techniques and methods of teaching that were different from traditional learning theory and approaches. We now have and are developing such techniques. The results of this should be more individuals returning to community living and thus needing and requesting the services of recreation and park agencies.

Related Services. The authors of P.L. 94-142 have also defined "Related Services" as part of the total conditions of the law. "Related Services" is defined as ". . . transportation and such other supportive services

Illinois Parks and Recreation 26 March/April, 1977

(including speech pathology and audiology, psychological services, physical and occupational therapy, recreation and medical and counseling services . . ."¹. These services are to be implemented as necessary to assist a handicapped child to benefit from special education.

This aspect of the law is a giant step forward for recreation, since it is the first time that the term "recreation" appears in print in such educational legislation. Prior to this time, recreation was only alluded to in vague or indirect terms and as such was more than difficult to interpret or substantiate. The result was an overriding defeat of its significance. Whether intentional or not, the authors of this legislation have given permission for recreation to be a legitimate part of the total education process.

Recreators, regardless of their field of specialization (parks, administration, programming, therapeutic), need to acknowledge this opportunity and responsibility for service. Educators will not necessarily pick up on and move with the implications of service in the area of recreation. They will need information, direction and training in order to incorporate recreation into curricula and programs. The historical and long standing separation of education and recreation services will need to be reexamined. The opportunity to unite for the attainment of common goals is clearly delineated within the law.

Much of the responsibility, however, rests on the willingness and initiative of recreators to get involved so that appropriate programs are defined, designed, implemented and evaluated within school curricula. In order to facilitate this involvement, training programs will need to be conducted for park and recreation personnel to prepare them both attitudinally and technically for the input that will be required.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Several other conditions of P.L. 94-142 bear mentioning that have direct and indirect implications for recreation and park personnel and programs.

Individualized Programs. The law states "specially designed instruction ... to meet the unique needs of the handicapped child."¹ This is interpreted and defined as "individual educational programs." A requirement of such individual education programs is assessment of the individual, the specification of individual education objectives, the selection and planning of services, the development of evaluation criteria, and a plan for review of progress. This level of individualization is rarely found in recreational programs. The result is a definitive need to train recreation personnel in the techniques of individual program planning, including assessment, determination and specification of objectives, selection and prescription of program, content and services, and evaluation.

Least Restrictive Environment. Another aspect of the law, designates the condition of "best restrictive environment." This implies that the child should receive services in the setting that meets his or her unique needs, but within the most "normal" environment. Segregation of children into special schools, or special classrooms is not acceptable under this stipulation. A child may need a special class for one subject matter, but be fully capable of being in a non-handicapped class for another subject. An example would be a student with cerebral palsy who may need a special class in speech, but be fully able to join the regular art class with other students of his or her own age.

Programs serving special populations in recreation would do well to acknowledge this principle also. Although there is a definitive need for special programs for some handicapped individuals, there is also the reality that many of them can and should be involved in the regular programs offered by recreation agencies. The issue of efficiency, convenience or economic feasibility often biases our programming decisions and violates the concept of "least restrictive environment."

Accessible Facilities. Written into the law is a provision of funds to modify existing education facilities so that they are accessible and usable for handicapped students. Architectural barriers have continuously been a major obstacle to involvement of special populations. Recreation and park facilities have traditionally been among the many public service agencies violating this right of people to participate. Under this new law, funding will be available to renovate and modify existing educational buildings many of which contain areas which are used for recreational purposes. Barrier free design of all new facilities hopefully will be the rule, not the exception. Recreation and park facilities should be constructed with the same principle in mind to avoid later confrontation and costly renovation.

IMPLEMENTATION

Implementing P.L. 94-142 calls for state plans which include specific local district needs. Federal funding will be appropriated which passes money to the local districts each year providing the conditions of the law and state plan are met. Of vital concern at this time is the issue of input on the part of the recreation profession. Leisure education and recreation must be incorporated into the state plans in order to insure the inclusion of these concerns in programs as well as the qualification for funding in these areas.

SUMMARY

Public Law 94-142 brings into

Continued on Page 34

Illinois Parks and Recreation 27 March/April, 1977

WHY WE CAN'T WAIT ...

Continued from Page 27

existence a whole new concept related to the rights and opportunities of handicapped individuals. It unites educational concerns with "total living" issues including leisure, transportation and accessibility of the environment. The leisure professions, although not specifically mandated in the legislation would be wise to gear up for the implications of the law. Handicapped individuals in our communities are currently needing and in the future, will be demanding our services and facilities. The "Education for All Handicapped Children Act" pushes, prods, and promotes an awareness of the reality that we can no longer neglect.

(Editors Note: Dr. Carol Peterson is Therapeutic Recreation Specialist with the Office of Recreation and Park Resources, University of Illinois)

REFERENCES

1. Public Law 94 142, 94th Congress, S.6 November 29, 1975.

2. Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. Discussion Document for Regional Input Meetings. Office of Education, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. 1976

3. Szymanski, David J. "P.L. 94-142, The Education for All Handicapped Childrens Act . . ." Therapeutic Recreation Journal, First Quarter, 1976, pp. 6-9.

Illinois Parks and Recreation 34 March/April, 1977