Obstacles, Starting Points, and Doldrums Notwithstanding: Reform/Revolution from Outcomes Criteria

Commentary and rebuttal concerning four articles reacting to “Special Education Reform: School Psychology Revolution” were provided. The major deficiency in the generally negative reviews by Kauffman and Hynd was insufficient consideration of fundamental problems in the current delivery system. Hynd cautioned against premature abandonment of the medical model and suggested neuropsychological approaches would improve diagnosis of learning disabilities. Medical model conceptions and neuropsychological approaches were rejected in this rebuttal because they fail to meet an outcomes criterion. Moreover, the current special education delivery system is vulnerable to attacks from an outcomes criterion, setting the stage for consideration of a variety of alternatives. These alternatives need to be encouraged by the federal government, a very recent development promoted by Assistant Secretary Will (1986). Moreover, a change in the fundamental paradigm as suggested by Kovaleski will be a part of the reform/revolution. Decisions on models and approaches need to be based on outcomes for students. Models which are clearly related to positive outcomes for students need to be expanded and implemented broadly. Models or systems with unknown or dubious benefits for students need to be curtailed and replaced. Benefits to students using outcomes criteria are expected to drive the current special education system to significant reform, leading to revolution in school psychology.