Rejection of the Alternative Definition for EBD

Rejection of the Alternative Definition for EBD

The Mental Health and Special Education Coalition in 1990 was determined to develop a more functional definition and advocated for changes in the federal definition. This group suggested the changes in the name used to provide a name with more utility, less stigma, and more representation of learners experiencing issues with behavior or emotion. Surprisingly, the proposed name EBD was rejected. The proposed name was rejected because of its ambiguity in definition or confusion and the increase in students identified with special education. First, the NSBA members feared this definition would cause dramatic increases in learners identified for special education services for ED, causing considerable expenses for the local and state school districts (Yell et al., 2013). This would burden the school disbursement budget.

Secondly, the ambiguity of the definition of emotional disorder (ED) caused confusion with the term learning disorder (LD). Since there is an inability to learn, people confuse ED with the definition of a learning disability. As such, there is a possibility of interpretation and misunderstanding of the word. There is no common understanding of the term ED. Disappointingly, the definition of EBD is contradictory and confusing as it excludes socially maladjusted kids. This name has numerous controversies and confusion. For example, the “federal definition uses the term emotional disturbance, most practitioners in the field use the term emotional and behavioral disorders” (Yell et al., 2013). As a result, this would cause stigma and biases as a particular group is left out by definition. Due to the ambiguity and confusion in the definition of the word ED, it was rejected.

Apart from the confusion and ambiguity, the proposed name could not maintain or build good relationships with peers or teachers, which suggests social adjustment issues. The proposed name even left out the maladjusted people, meaning it does not fully cover those with disability. This means the name would not enable smooth relations among peers or teachers, which is likely to cause several social problems.

Reference

Yell, M. L., Meadows, N. B., Drasgow, E., & Shriner, J. G. (2013). Evidence-Based Practices for Educating Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Boston, MA: Pearson.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Rejection of the Alternative Definition for EBD

Why was the alternative definition for EBD proposed by the Mental Health and Special Education Coalition rejected?