Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The question you keep avoiding is:
- Where is the study that demonstrates putting SPED students in normal classes improves the outcomes for traditional students and teachers?
- Where is the study that demonstrates it has a positive ROI?

---

I gave you three at 8:34pm yesterday.
Indiana University (2022), Szumski, Smogorzewska, and Karwowski (2017), Kefallinou et al. (2020). At 9:43pm you said I glossed over the question and you wouldn't read them. Since cowboy said on another thread anything pre COVID is unreliable because education has changed let me give you more within his parameters you can check out.

Symeonidou et al. / Frontiers in Psychology (2025)neutral to slightly positive for all involved
Kefallinou et al. / European Agency for Special Needs (2020)found small, but positive correlations
Dalgaard et al. / Campbell Systematic Reviews (2022)gen ed students didn't go up but they didn't go down either. They called it neutral impact.
The Indiana study was repeated in 2022 with similar results and a new write up
Fryberg et al. (2021 Quality Cohort Analysis)small, but positive correlations for all
Haring Center / University of Washington Research Brief (2024)benefits for all because teachers must use highly varied, instructional strategies
Literature Review in Education Sciences (2021)existing literature shows a positive bump for both gen ed and SPED students when in the same classroom because the environment is cooperative
I could keep going…

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

El Oso said:

---

That's a pretty blatant misrepresentation of the Indiana research team.
Dr. Sandi Cole (Ed.D.): She is the director of the Center on Education and Lifelong Learning (CELL) and manages the Special Education Leadership Program at the IU School of Education. Before her academic career, she spent 22 years as a public school teacher and administrator at both elementary and secondary levels. She has directed over $20 million in state and federal educational grants.
Dr. Hardy R. Murphy (Ph.D.): He is a clinical professor in the School of Education at Indiana University. His career spans roles as a public school teacher, principal, and assistant superintendent. His primary research focuses on urban education, systemic school improvement, educational equity, and special education inclusion.
Dr. Teresa A. Grossi (Ph.D.): She holds a Ph.D. in Applied Behavior Analysis and Special Education from The Ohio State University. She has worked as a community-based instructor, vocational transition coordinator, and expert witness for the Department of Justice regarding transition services for individuals with disabilities. She has secured more than $30 million in external research grants

Dr. Cole and her team are highly regarded for applying advanced statistical models specifically propensity score matching to educational policy. This method isolates the "placement" as the only variable, solving a massive, decades-old flaw in previous special education research. Read that last sentence again. They solved a flaw in existing research. That's pretty high end work.

There's a ton more on why these three are at the top of research on this issue.

---

I acknowledged it was a subjective comment, but both are advocates not traditional academics. There is zero percent chance the goal was presented and the research laid out to meet that goal. What has been demonstrated clearly during the last 10 years is the so-called academic research is much less objective than we were led to believe 50 years ago. This is a world where Jason Arday can be a "world renowned" scholar at Cambridge. If you're honest, if a guy that worked 20 years for the NRA released a research paper saying more guns reduce gun deaths, you would question it. Just be intellectually honest and consistent (I would too question it).

---

1. Combined Dr. Cole (22 years), Dr. Hardy (33 years) and Dr. Grossi (40 years) have 95 years of classroom experience. As college professors now, they research educational issues. In what way are they not academics. You say you know education but you don't even know what the word academic means. An academic is a person who works, teaches, or does research at a college or university.

2. I'm not listing single studies. I've listed at least half a dozen, which you have admitted you haven't and won't read. You're right. A single study proves nothing. Multiple studies, done the same way, reaching similar conclusions create a consensus. My studies do the latter, but you don't know that because you haven't read them. You also aren't in the field.

3. I would question his study. See number two. It's one study saying one thing. Does it hold up when we put it up against other research. If the answer is yes, it gains credibility and leads to consensus. If it doesn't--it's a single study and it may be right. It may be wrong.

---

I appreciate the cuteness, I do ... yes, I agree that someone who works at a university is an "academic" even in an education school. Maybe a more precise word choice was researcher. There is a difference between someone who is a classically trained researcher and someone who is an advocate who gets a job at a university to do advocacy work and then produces "research" to support his advocacy.

Again, I'll posit the simple question. If a person who was chair of the NRA for 22 years got a job at a university teaching about gun safety and produced a study that claimed more guns reduced gun violence and gun accidents, would you approach that with suspicion? Again, you sort of ignore that part of the Academy - especially in the grievance studies areas - long ago left academic rigor in favor of a world where Jason Arday gets a professorship at Cambridge and "academics" from global warming advocates to covid nuts are caught faking research.

Although I started it, there is not sense throwing grievance studies "research" at one another because it's pointless.

At the end of the day, the vaunted Indiana study cited a < 5% improvement in SPED test scores. If you have the data where it shows how much it improved non-SPED scores, please post it.

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The question you keep avoiding is:
- Where is the study that demonstrates putting SPED students in normal classes improves the outcomes for traditional students and teachers?
- Where is the study that demonstrates it has a positive ROI?

---

I gave you three at 8:34pm yesterday.
Indiana University (2022), Szumski, Smogorzewska, and Karwowski (2017), Kefallinou et al. (2020). At 9:43pm you said I glossed over the question and you wouldn't read them. Since cowboy said on another thread anything pre COVID is unreliable because education has changed let me give you more within his parameters you can check out.

Symeonidou et al. / Frontiers in Psychology (2025)neutral to slightly positive for all involved
Kefallinou et al. / European Agency for Special Needs (2020)found small, but positive correlations
Dalgaard et al. / Campbell Systematic Reviews (2022)gen ed students didn't go up but they didn't go down either. They called it neutral impact.
The Indiana study was repeated in 2022 with similar results and a new write up
Fryberg et al. (2021 Quality Cohort Analysis)small, but positive correlations for all
Haring Center / University of Washington Research Brief (2024)benefits for all because teachers must use highly varied, instructional strategies
Literature Review in Education Sciences (2021)existing literature shows a positive bump for both gen ed and SPED students when in the same classroom because the environment is cooperative
I could keep going…

---

If we grant all your studies are 100% true for arguments sake, make the case why SPED students should not be be placed in AP classes and given appropriate accommodations to ensure they can pass the tests.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The question you keep avoiding is:
- Where is the study that demonstrates putting SPED students in normal classes improves the outcomes for traditional students and teachers?
- Where is the study that demonstrates it has a positive ROI?

---

I gave you three at 8:34pm yesterday.
Indiana University (2022), Szumski, Smogorzewska, and Karwowski (2017), Kefallinou et al. (2020). At 9:43pm you said I glossed over the question and you wouldn't read them. Since cowboy said on another thread anything pre COVID is unreliable because education has changed let me give you more within his parameters you can check out.

Symeonidou et al. / Frontiers in Psychology (2025)neutral to slightly positive for all involved
Kefallinou et al. / European Agency for Special Needs (2020)found small, but positive correlations
Dalgaard et al. / Campbell Systematic Reviews (2022)gen ed students didn't go up but they didn't go down either. They called it neutral impact.
The Indiana study was repeated in 2022 with similar results and a new write up
Fryberg et al. (2021 Quality Cohort Analysis)small, but positive correlations for all
Haring Center / University of Washington Research Brief (2024)benefits for all because teachers must use highly varied, instructional strategies
Literature Review in Education Sciences (2021)existing literature shows a positive bump for both gen ed and SPED students when in the same classroom because the environment is cooperative
I could keep going…

---

If we grant all your studies are 100% true for arguments sake, make the case why SPED students should not be be placed in AP classes and given appropriate accommodations to ensure they can pass the tests.

---

I already said if a SPED student can pass the test to get in, they should be allowed in and their accommodations followed. This is exactly what my son did. He's not in advanced classes he did not qualify for.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

At the end of the day, the vaunted Indiana study cited a < 5% improvement in SPED test scores. If you have the data where it shows how much it improved non-SPED scores, please post it.

---

If you would have read the study you would see that number too.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Again, I'll posit the simple question. If a person who was chair of the NRA for 22 years got a job at a university teaching about gun safety and produced a study that claimed more guns reduced gun violence and gun accidents, would you approach that with suspicion? Again, you sort of ignore that part of the Academy - especially in the grievance studies areas - long ago left academic rigor in favor of a world where Jason Arday gets a professorship at Cambridge and "academics" from global warming advocates to covid nuts are caught faking research.

---

I thoroughly answered your NRA question. But I will do it again. If his article went against the prevailing research in the field, I would be suspicious. Actually, truth be told I wouldn't because I think he's right. But I do continue to look into this area because I do argue a lot for guns on this board.

But if I were suspicious, if it stood up to that suspicion under investigation, I would release my suspicion. The difference between the NRA guy and my researchers is they don't go against the prevailing research (in your scenario). They are the prevailing research. But because they're democrats and they are finding evidence you are wrong, you are deciding to double down on your beliefs. That is your right.

You tried to challenge the Indiana researchers credibility and failed miserably. Those of us in education know they are the best of the best and their qualifications in this area are second to none. We also frown on Jason Arday just like you do. He makes it really easy for people like you to question studies that find the opposite of your paradigm. If one researcher is bad, they are all bad. Don't worry. I fall victim to hasty generalizations too. I won't go anywhere near a Honda dealership when I need a new car because I bought a lemon as my Baylor graduation present to myself. I'll never be able to let that experience go.

But I will let this thread go with you. Good night.

I have Zero knowledge of the education game, so I will defer to the one who live it and understand it. Sounds like a solid idea to me. I have seen it work.

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

The question you keep avoiding is:
- Where is the study that demonstrates putting SPED students in normal classes improves the outcomes for traditional students and teachers?
- Where is the study that demonstrates it has a positive ROI?

---

I gave you three at 8:34pm yesterday.
Indiana University (2022), Szumski, Smogorzewska, and Karwowski (2017), Kefallinou et al. (2020). At 9:43pm you said I glossed over the question and you wouldn't read them. Since cowboy said on another thread anything pre COVID is unreliable because education has changed let me give you more within his parameters you can check out.

Symeonidou et al. / Frontiers in Psychology (2025)neutral to slightly positive for all involved
Kefallinou et al. / European Agency for Special Needs (2020)found small, but positive correlations
Dalgaard et al. / Campbell Systematic Reviews (2022)gen ed students didn't go up but they didn't go down either. They called it neutral impact.
The Indiana study was repeated in 2022 with similar results and a new write up
Fryberg et al. (2021 Quality Cohort Analysis)small, but positive correlations for all
Haring Center / University of Washington Research Brief (2024)benefits for all because teachers must use highly varied, instructional strategies
Literature Review in Education Sciences (2021)existing literature shows a positive bump for both gen ed and SPED students when in the same classroom because the environment is cooperative
I could keep going…

---

If we grant all your studies are 100% true for arguments sake, make the case why SPED students should not be be placed in AP classes and given appropriate accommodations to ensure they can pass the tests.

---

I already said if a SPED student can pass the test to get in, they should be allowed in and their accommodations followed. This is exactly what my son did. He's not in advanced classes he did not qualify for.

---

You're not being intellectually honest. SPED students traditional, non-AP classes are given accommodations so they can pass. If they were not given accommodations, they would not pass thus would not qualify to get in. So make the case as to why SPED students should not be given accommodations to participation in AP classes, i.e. not have to take the test, given a different test that matches their situation, etc.?

You're studies show that the presence of SPED students enhance the education of traditional students, so is it fair to deprive AP students of their presence? Would not both SPED students and AP students benefit from their presence in AP classes?

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

At the end of the day, the vaunted Indiana study cited a < 5% improvement in SPED test scores. If you have the data where it shows how much it improved non-SPED scores, please post it.

---

If you would have read the study you would see that number too.

---

Exactly. I read the study and did the math. Do you think a < 5% change is material?

Speaking of studies, you keep ignoring the ones I shared that contradict all of yours - porque?

El Oso said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Again, I'll posit the simple question. If a person who was chair of the NRA for 22 years got a job at a university teaching about gun safety and produced a study that claimed more guns reduced gun violence and gun accidents, would you approach that with suspicion? Again, you sort of ignore that part of the Academy - especially in the grievance studies areas - long ago left academic rigor in favor of a world where Jason Arday gets a professorship at Cambridge and "academics" from global warming advocates to covid nuts are caught faking research.

---

I thoroughly answered your NRA question. But I will do it again. If his article went against the prevailing research in the field, I would be suspicious. Actually, truth be told I wouldn't because I think he's right. But I do continue to look into this area because I do argue a lot for guns on this board.

But if I were suspicious, if it stood up to that suspicion under investigation, I would release my suspicion. The difference between the NRA guy and my researchers is they don't go against the prevailing research (in your scenario). They are the prevailing research. But because they're democrats and they are finding evidence you are wrong, you are deciding to double down on your beliefs. That is your right.

You tried to challenge the Indiana researchers credibility and failed miserably. Those of us in education know they are the best of the best and their qualifications in this area are second to none. We also frown on Jason Arday just like you do. He makes it really easy for people like you to question studies that find the opposite of your paradigm. If one researcher is bad, they are all bad. Don't worry. I fall victim to hasty generalizations too. I won't go anywhere near a Honda dealership when I need a new car because I bought a lemon as my Baylor graduation present to myself. I'll never be able to let that experience go.

But I will let this thread go with you. Good night.

---

Just because you claim I failed miserably does not make it a fact. The actual fact is that both "researchers" were long-time advocates who retired form secondary education and got a job at a university to continue their advocacy. I posted five or six students that contradicted their claims, and your position seems to be if you just ignore them they will go away. Cambridge University said Jason Arday was the foremost expert in his field. So just because one guy employed by a university claims another is an "expert" does not by fiat make it so. I actually searched both online and found little great praise for either outside of information published by their employer.

Rather than keep going back to the same well, explain why the studies that disprove their "research" are wrong.

State scores were released today.... and the results are not good. Not just for SPED students but all students.

The STAAR test is a joke. It needs to go.

cowboycwr said:

---

State scores were released today.... and the results are not good. Not just for SPED students but all students.

The STAAR test is a joke. It needs to go.

---

Maybe if we put SPED kids in AP classes they would do better.

Still waiting for a clearly reasoned explanation of why AP students should be prevented from the benefits of having SPED kids in their classes, but we know that's never going to happen ...

Another example - the LWNJ scatter when they have to think
Independently and actually formulate an argument.

Education Expert?

Surely with such expertise this is a so
E question.

Still waiting on the case as to why SPED students should not be placed in AP classes.