Social Maladjustment and Special Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The federal definition of emotional disturbance (ED) includes a social maladjustment (SM) exclusion clause that stipulates that students are not eligible for special education services if they are determined to be “socially maladjusted” and not also meeting criteria for ED. This clause has long been criticized for being ambiguous and confusing. Although the clause is not defined in federal regulations, it remains in each new reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (most recent, Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act [IDEIA], 2004). This study provides an updated review of state practices regarding the use and interpretation of the clause, which has not been conducted since 1994. We examined state definitions, clarifications to terminology, and assessment recommendations to determine whether inconsistencies continue to exist across states. We present the results of a national survey that examined state and local school professionals’ reported practices regarding the exclusion and compared it with the policy of the state in which each respondent resides. Results indicated that states are moving toward the adoption of the federal definition of ED, which includes the clause. This is the case even though state regulations, and staff-reported use and knowledge of the clause continue to be inconsistent across states.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".